Hi,
I am working with a matrix driver on which a router control app can perform some actions (e.g., Lock and Unlock outputs). In its current state, the drive is able to successfully lock and unlock the outputs through the Matrix, and such modifications can also be seen in the Router Control application.
Nevertheless, when performing the lock/unlock from the Router Control application, such actions are not performed on the device, since such actions are not sent to the device (at least are not shown on the stream viewer).
Considering this, and since this is my first matrix driver, may someone provide me with some pointers of where to look for the issue? For instance, which variable/parameters are used for biding the router control app with the driver?
(Note: I saw that the DiscreetInfo parameter/variable receives events from the router control.)
Hi,
It’s not clear if the device supports lock actions or not. Below info is in case the device does not support it but you still want to see locking in the UI.
You’re going to need to trigger on the incoming events that are coming from the Router Control and further process these similar like is normally being done, but instead of sending it to the device you need to directly set the lock state with the MatrixHelper, this way the correct value is going to be set on the read parameter that the Router Control is using.
To summarize:
With device support:
->Execute ProcessParameterSetFromUI on MatrixHelper, OnLockSetFromUI gets triggered, send command to device, read out value from device, set MatrixHelper with read value
Without device support:
->Execute ProcessParameterSetFromUI on MatrixHelper, OnLockSetFromUI gets triggered, set MatrixHelper with this value that triggered it
If the device does support the lock and you want to support it in the driver then please take a look at the SLC SDF Matrix driver, range 1.0.0 supports matrix and router table parameters, range 1.0.1 is only matrix parameter, range 1.0.2 only contains the router control table parameters
Hi Laurens,
it seems that the current driver’s behaviour corresponds to the one described in “without device support”. Nevertheless, since it works correctly with the matrix, I believe that the correct behaviour should be the one described in “with device support”.
(note: more information regarding the performed tests has been added above)
If I understand your question correct then you’re only using a matrix parameter that is loaded in the Router Control app, but no Router Control table parameters right? If you get the DiscreetInfo parameter value with NoChange when trying to lock/unlock then it feels like a software issue
How do you get to the value “NoChange”? Can you write out what the exact value is coming from the DiscreetInfo parameter when locking an output that was not locked before? So not writing what the matrixhelper is mentioning but the actual raw string value of the DiscreetInfo parameter (execute a protocol.GetParameter call)
After taking a look together, it turns out that you’re using the very first (premature) version of the MatrixHelper. If you would modify the driver to use the MatrixHelper from the ClassLibrary that is available in DIS then this problem won’t occur anymore. I’ve tested this with the latest version of the MatrixHelper on DataMiner 10.0.10 and there it’s working perfectly: locking from Router Control sends the command to the device and adapts the matrix parameter itself.
it seems that it was a case sensitive issue. Not sure if related but, the driver uses an older Matrix Helper Class and depending on where the updates comes from (router control app or matrix), the value of “discreet info” parameter has different lower and upper case characters .
Hi Flavio,
Do I understand correctly that both from the Matrix UI or the Router Control, you can see the lock/unlock, but it’s never set to the device?
If the DiscreetInfo parameter receives the event, then you will need to check the QAction that handles these events and verify that these specific changes are actually triggering any logic.
It could for example be that you can lock/unlock in DataMiner, but that this is something that the device itself doesn’t support.
Hi Joey,
I should have provided more info regarding the tests already made (I apologize for that).
– When setting the lock/unlock from the matrix, the procedures appears to be successfully done. The action is sent to the device and the device acknowledges it.
– When setting the lock/unlock from the router control app, it appears that the action is not sent to the device.
After investigating why the above behaviour I saw that:
– When the set is done from the matrix the DiscreetInfo parameter has the value “Lock”, which triggers the required actions-
– When the set is done from the Router Control the DiscreetInfo parameter has the value “NoChange”, which “bypasses” the required actions.
I don’t have experience with the Router Control itself, but it does sound like an issue if the DiscreetInfo parameter doesn’t contain the correct info. I suggest to create a task to investigate this.
Providing more info regarding the tests performed:
– When setting the lock/unlock from the matrix, the procedures appears to be successfully done. The action is sent to the device and the device acknowledges it.
– When setting the lock/unlock from the router control app, it appears that the action is not sent to the device.
After investigating why the above behaviour I saw that:
– When the set is done from the matrix the DiscreetInfo parameter has the value “Lock”, which triggers the required actions-
– When the set is done from the Router Control the DiscreetInfo parameter has the value “NoChange”, which “bypasses” the required actions.