LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Rather Long Execution Time for Release Queue.vi

Hi,

 

I could in fact not really strip down the example, too much customer IP. Instead I tried to reprogram the procedure we're using from scratch. But this is not showing the behaviour....

Guess I'll have to review the code again.

Just to let you know.

 

Thanks for your valuable input so far!

Regards

Oli

0 Kudos
Message 11 of 14
(885 Views)

@Oli_Wachno wrote:

Hi,

 

I could in fact not really strip down the example, too much customer IP. Instead I tried to reprogram the procedure we're using from scratch. But this is not showing the behaviour....

Guess I'll have to review the code again.

Just to let you know.

 

Thanks for your valuable input so far!

Regards

Oli


When that happens (recoding it fixed it) there is a really good chance that you did something remarkable to the code oin the BD.  (hidden code, wire behind rather than through a sub-vi, dup objects on top of each other)

 

You did run VI Analizer to catch these types of mistakes right?  

 

Time to check the cal of my magic 8-BallSmiley LOL

~~~Oh 8-Ball did Oli run VIA?~~~ It seams improbable.


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 12 of 14
(831 Views)

I have to disappoint you! I had played the VIA ball as well as the DETT ball before posting this question Smiley Happy

Message 13 of 14
(797 Views)

@Oli_Wachno wrote:

I have to disappoint you! I had played the VIA ball as well as the DETT ball before posting this question Smiley Happy


I'm not dissapointed at all! Mega-Kudos-  (you could have mentioned that before):smileyvery-happy:  Both are often overlooked troubleshooting aids.   I'm glad you know about them.  I doubt Heap Peek would find anything so, I'm stumped.

 

If you do ever find out what unfortunate star went nova and sent the cosmic ray that blasted that hole in your code let me know!


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 14 of 14
(775 Views)