Alain1533 2 Posted January 25, 2021 Alright, I'll prepare the code and do the test tomorrow morning Merci Share this post Link to post
Guest Posted January 25, 2021 8 minutes ago, Alain1533 said: Alright, I'll prepare the code and do the test tomorrow morning Just few things, in that particular packet code handling might be a difference in execution time that might lead to this, what do come to mind here scenarios like these 1) Are you using Sleep(1) ! because sleep 1 is in fact most the time is sleep(15) or sleep(16) , and having the IDE opened on the device will make it Sleep(1), why because if the code processing is taking 2ms then it will make sense of these 13ms 2) What is the fate of the data of that packet, been zipped ?, i remember a bug with the IDE been shipped with unoptimized zip binary for only 64bit, or are you sending the data to DB, also here might be difference in the DB engine for 64bit vs 32bit... etc , in other words are you using 3rd-party library here ? Just food for thoughts. Share this post Link to post
Alain1533 2 Posted January 25, 2021 No I don't use sleep The data is binary data, on the PC side it comes from a memory Mapper file. in fact, it is a Byte buffer. No, i don't use 3rd-party library, only overbyte On the other hand, it is a real time timer which tests every 2 ms if the PLC has finished sending its DBs, if so, it will send its data again, and so on, I will make you a zip of the drivers Share this post Link to post
FPiette 383 Posted January 25, 2021 Warning: to much logging or display will drastically slow down network I/O. It is better to log in memory (TMemoryStream) during the execution and save to a file if needed at the end of program. Share this post Link to post
Angus Robertson 574 Posted January 26, 2021 I've just written a new TIcsInetAlive component, will be in SVN shortly, it measures the round time for ping and HTTP requests, and these are my results from Windows 10 over FTTC to a London data centre where Microsofts hosts this domain. 08:31:24 Check Alive Ping to www.msftconnecttest.com (13.107.4.52) took 5 msecs 08:31:24 Check Alive to http://www.msftconnecttest.com/connecttest.txt (13.107.4.52) took 16 msecs 08:31:49 Check Alive Ping to ipv6.msftconnecttest.com ([2a01:111:2003::52]) took 5 msecs 08:31:49 Check Alive to http://ipv6.msftconnecttest.com/connecttest.txt ([2a01:111:2003::52]) took 15 msecs Note HTTP is the complete lookup DNS, connect, get a page, close cycle, not just send and receive a packet. I'm only timing with ticks, not performance counter, but I believe ticks are reasonably accurate in modern versions of Windows. Angus Share this post Link to post
Alain1533 2 Posted January 26, 2021 (edited) Bonjour, Sorry, but I'm very busy today. I found where the time to wait came from, I use a Timer component in order to cycle the requests, 1 Emission / Reception every 2 ms at the miximum, otherwise the PLc is out of order. This timer uses "Synchronize" to call a "Callback" which signals the timer, and that's what was taking time. What is strange is that it does not pose a problem with a Windows 10 32bits. I specify that this is not the standard component of the VCL but one of our components. So, now I use a Thread which controls the start of the Send / Receive cycle and which at the end of the loop waits a fixed time of 2ms before resuming another Send / Receive cycle. This time is adjustable, it uses "TStopwatch" to measure the time. On my simulator it works perfectly, on a machine with Windows 32bits or Windows 64 bits, we will do the tests with the real PLC. So the problem was not with the ICS components, which gives us complete satisfaction on all our machines. We'll see tomorrow thank you very much for your help Alain Edited January 26, 2021 by Alain1533 Share this post Link to post