Every room gets a processor in 99% of my systems, rarely comes in handy for me.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212" <floyd1212@...> wrote:
I hear what you are saying, but I think there is some benefit, at least in this situation. This is a commercial job, and the programs in slots 4-8 are for conference rooms in the building. Being able to work on a room that is available to me, and not have to reboot a room that is currently occupied, is a benefit.
Obviously, if I have to update something in slots 1-3, there could be an impact on all 5 rooms, depending on what resources they are using in them.
That being said, life would be much easier if I could deal with a single program, and not have a bunch of EISCs going on. But, then I would probably have to work a night shift if I wanted to get anything done.
--- In Crestron@..., "matt_rasmussen_2000" <mjrtoo@> wrote:
I might challenge if it's even a benefit to run multiple programs at all if you're sharing logic between them anyway. There might be exceptions, but in general it's fairly useless to me.
--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212" <floyd1212@> wrote:
I have a CP3 with programs running in 8 slots. Slots 1-3 are running programs to control the source equipment in the rack: Slot1 for DM and PAD8s, Slot2 for some media players, Slot3 for a pair of Biamps. Slots 4-8 are programs for individual rooms.
If I have signals that originate from Slot2, for example, and are sent to Slots4-8, is it more efficient to minimize the EISC traffic, even if it means some duplicate logic in the 5 program slots that contain the loom logic, or should I create a single instance of that logic in Slot2, even though it means more EISC traffic.
Obviously, it would depend on how much logic vs. how many EISC signals we are talking about, but I guess it's more of a theoretical question.
