When side A requests an update from side B, B sends a single "clear" followed by the non-zero data. If you have one signal defined at Join 1, and another at Join 4000 it would at most send 2 states.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In Crestron@..., Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...> wrote:
If i understand: On the "genericly-named" remote end, where all of the signals are defined, an update request will cause a slew of data to flow out, back to the main. On the "main" end, where fewer signals are defined, the corresponding update-request will generate less data towards the remote end.
I guess the question is simplest as: Do the undefined signals get transmitted, or only the defined?
Heath
On May 15, 2013, at 1:36 PM, Kool-Aid Drinker <herald@...> wrote:
EISC don't know what is on the receiving end, they send based on their
inputs whether the other end has a matching output or not.
So, network traffic and overhead.
On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:35:50 -0600, Heath Volmer <hvolmer@...>
wrote:
Experimenting with making a "generic" sort of bridge between two programs to break up the
organization of a program, and to off-load some potentially heavy processing.
If, in the program broken away from the main program, I define an EISC with a ton of
generic signals (dig1, dig 2... 600 of each flavor maybe) and in the main program only use
the signals that are relevant, do I wind up with a mass of updating going on between
programs or does it only update those signals that are defined on the sending end?
I could potentially have many of these EISCs, but only heavily-loaded in the remote program.
Heath
