LabVIEW and large data sets are incompatible. T/F? I say T.

[mcduff]

Well if you mentioned Picoscope earlier, you may have been pointed to this thread which shows some weirdness with provided DLL. My guess is what you are seeing is related to that thread.

[rolfk]

---

@mcduff wrote:

Well if you mentioned Picoscope earlier, you may have been pointed to this thread which shows some weirdness with provided DLL. My guess is what you are seeing is related to that thread.

---

If the problems with the data disappearing at the “wall” was with the PicoScope driver I wholeheartedly would agree. Not sure about their newest driver (or your own if you did them yourself as your post in the other  thread makes it sound like) but PicoScope driver versions from a few years back were blatantly violating dataflow rules by trying to treat LabVIEW arrays as pointers that the dll would then fill in asynchronously. That not only can’t work since LabVIEW reserves the right to reuse, relocate, or dispose of arrays at any point in time except DURING the call to a Call Library Node, but can even result in full crashes or maybe even possibly eat your hard disk.

You have been warned!

[*3d0g]

mcduff: Thank you.  I've read that.  How about you?  What do you think of their wrappers?  Do they work out of the box?

[*3d0g]

Rolfk: "Not sure about their newest driver but PicoScope driver versions from a few years back..."

Right.  I'm thinking by newest you're meaning the 9k, vs 4k or 5k.

PicoScope works, I've found, but not out of the box.  But I'm no pro such as yourself.  I was just solving a problem that came about through working with their early stuff, their LabVIEW code.  The rabbit hole just went deeper, and I just started digging through their API and moved forward.  This was 2ka and 3ka.  It's been a while, but what I came up with back when works, or so it seems.  Yes, I definitely hear your warning.  I'm just curious how their stuff is now.  Does it work? Now?  They've moved it to GitHub, since. ...minus the SDK and docs, which can still be had at pico. I've noticed they are in the NI drivers database, now, with their 9k; other stuff, no.  Is there significance, there?  I really want to know about their wrappers from those with experience with them.  That I know of there is no better scope hardware for the PC and USB and that's it.  Do you disagree?    

[mcduff]

---

@*3d0g wrote:

mcduff: Thank you.  I've read that.  How about you?  What do you think of their wrappers?  Do they work out of the box?

---

I have no experience with them.

[*3d0g]

"So the simple solution is to switch to LabVIEW-64bit as it is recommended for operations with large memory requirements."

That was the solution.  I had a few hitches, picoscope-wise, but yep, that did it.  You were the first to give that solution.

It could be done with 32-bit LabVIEW, BUT it'd take a lot of creativity, and that takes time, and time is money.