Multiple Application Instances Accessing Same DAQ Device

I have a fairly straightforward application that reads from a wireless DAQ device (NI-9205 connected to NI WLS-9163). I'd like to run multiple instances of the executable, but I get error -201105 (resource reserved) when the DAQmx task is started on the second instance. Each instance is attempting to acquire from different channels from the same DAQ device. Is this an issue with the DAQ device in particular, or with DAQmx in general? Thanks.
-Joe
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Hi Joe,
Unfortunately you can only access one type of channel with each program. For example you could have one program access AI and another use AO, but you cannot have two different programs access AI from the same card. This is common among all of NI DAQ devices.

Similar Messages

Can Multiple Applications Access same DAQ ni usB-6289 device?

I have to Run Multiple Instances of a LabVIEW Executable Simultaneously. Is it possible to access the same DAQ ni usB-6289 device for all of the LabVIEW instance?
Thanks.

dianageorge a écrit :
I have to Run Multiple Instances of a LabVIEW Executable Simultaneously. Is it possible to access the same DAQ ni usB-6289 device for all of the LabVIEW instance?
Thanks.
Never tried it but I doubt you will be able to acces the DAQ simultaneously, To verify it try accesing the DAQ in LabVIEW and in MAX at the same time.
Ben64

Sharing VISA Resources With Multiple Application Instances

I have noticed a strange behavior when attempting to communicate with a
slow, single shared VISA resource (GPIB device) from multiple
stand-alone LabView 5 applications.
Initially, I developed some code which first attempts to acquire
exclusive access to the device using VISA lock with a reasonably large
timeout. After the lock is acquired, the code performs its IO, then
releases the lock.
I then wrote some wrapper code which basically tries to enter the (lock,
IO, unlock) code as fast as possible. I built a stand-alone application,
and ran 3 seperate instances. Basically, I could see that each
instance would eventually acquire a lock, perform its IO, and unlock.
However, some of the instances "starved" for access to the device,
enough so that the timeout was sometime reached (each IO would take
perhaps 2 seconds, and I set the lock timeout to say 10 seconds).
Ideally, each instance should receive the lock in the order by which the
lock was requested. It appears that VISA is doing something else.
I've verified that this issue also exists with "faster" GPIB devices
(say 200ms IO turnaround), but is less noticable because the
communications are faster.
To get around this, I wrote another application which basically acts as
a resource server. Using VI server, each instance which wants access to
the resource sends a "lock" request to the server. Specifically, the
"client" calls a re-entrant "Interface" VI via VI Server. The
"interface" VI then adds the "lock" request to the queue, and then waits
for "Notification" from the server process. The server parses the
request queue, and when the resource is available, it sends a
notification to the appropriate "interface" VI. This whole time, the
client is waiting for the interface VI to return, just like when it's
waiting for a normal lock. When the client is done with the device, it
sends an "unlock" message to the interface VI. The server then gives
the resource to the next item in the queue.
To me, this is a bit kludgey. My solution requires that this "server"
application is running at all times, and it is a bit slower than the
usual manner. Has anyone come up with a better solution?
Thanks,
Andy

My answer depends how stand alone your applications are. I don't know what happens if you have several independant executable files but the simplest solution in the development environment is to have one vi that handles all send/receive requests to the instrument. In this way, without extra overhead, you guarantee single parts of each program access too your instrument. (don't make this vi reentrant naturally)
This approach has another advantage. You separate in a better way the instrument and your aplication, so changing to another instrument is easier to do.
greetings from the Netherlands

Can Multiple DOE users access same client

Dear All,
I have a use case where manager and his team have to use the same physical device ( It mean same client in the handheld and also the same application). Manager and all the team members are DOE Users.
As far as i know, we will have multiple local users in the client and mapped to single doe user, where as synchronization will happen through DOE sync user, who is configured in the client. During Sync DOE authenticates this user.
But in my use case, DOE should authenticate all the users (user with which i am synchronizing the data). Is this possible in the standard client? Is there any possibility to achieve this?
Regards,
Kiran.

HI,
Your requirement is a standard behavior and there is nothing like all the local client users are mapped to DOE users in default client.
If each local client user has a corresponding DOE server username(i guess it need to be the same username or so) , with a user logged in , he/she can provide their own sync password which will take sync user as the currently logged in local client user.
Only catch here that irrespective of which user is synching, all the messages in the queue (new data,modifications etc ) created by all the users will be send to server with this sync.
Regards,
Liji

Multiple browser instances receiving same session ID

I am using Firefox with OC4J, and I've discovered that multiple simultaneous instances of the browser are receiving the same session ID. This is a pretty serious problem I beleive, as it prevents the ability to safely store one browser instance's state information safely in the session. In other words, one browser instance's behavior can stomp on another browser instance's state data.
Does anyone know what criteria OC4J is using to determine session IDs, and whether to create a new session or deliver an existing one?
Thanks,
Brad

Tugdual,
Another comment -- the case where the cookie does not exist or is expired isn't the problem. The problem is when the cookie is valid and another browser instance is opened. Since the browser instances access the same cookie, you have no way of knowing on the server side that you are actually talking to two different browser instances. Hence, any storage of state information that is contextual has the potential to be stomped on by the other browser instances.
In my case, one browser instance (the result of a new window spawn in a UIX page) was knocking over the original window, because it was overwriting some important state infomration.
Brad

Multiple AIA instances on same Linux box

H,
Can multiple SOA instances be deployed on same linux box then with AIA on top of it.
Can some one pls answer this?
Regards,
Rakesh

Yes you can but:
Each SOA installation must be in his own ORACLE_HOME directory.
Each AIA installation must be in his own ORACLE_HOME directory.
You must point to different databases. You can not have mulitple SOA schema's in one sinlge database.
Marc
http://orasoa.blogspot.com

Multiple AIA instances on same server?

Hi,
Does anyone know how to install multiple AIA instances on the same SOA server? The installer hints that this might be possible, although I have not seen how this is done because the installer expects an empty oracle home path. The only information I have found so far is for an earlier 2.x release of AIA and that suggested:
"Each SOA installation must be in his own ORACLE_HOME directory.
Each AIA installation must be in his own ORACLE_HOME directory.
You must point to different databases. You can not have mulitple SOA schema's in one sinlge database."
Is this true?
Thanks,
Kev.

957354 wrote:
Hi Laxman,
If its a testing purpose its ok to have a one oracle_home and single listener for multiple DB. One problem when applying oracle patches for one of the instances running in a multiple DB running then you need to bring all the DB running in that host since the oracle_home is sharing between all db instances.
Thanks
Sunil Rajesh K.C.Starting with 11g, patchset updates are full installs and done into a new home. This makes it possible to migrate one instance at a time. However, your point would be a consideration for one-off patches like CPUs.
However, please note ... OP --- PLEASE NOTE even with multiple oracle homes, you still only need a single listener.

Multiple DMVPN Instances on Same WAN Interface

Hi Folks,
Is it possible to run Multiple DMVPN Instances on a single WAN Interface ? Can we for example configure 3 Tunnels on a Router using one same WAN Interface but running separate EIGRP Instances for each Tunnel ? Kindly let me know , Alioune

Hi Alioune,
Yes you can create DMVPN as you said with one WAN interface that is possible..... you can have multiple tunnel interfaces pointed to a WAN interface as the source interface which resides in public zone..... with different public ip's as the destination tunnel...
interface Tunnel1
description ** A-VPN Tunnel **
bandwidth 100000
ip vrf forwarding red
ip address 10.0.252.2 255.255.255.252
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
ip mtu 1500
load-interval 60
tunnel source GigabitEthernet0/0 (WAN Interface)
tunnel destination 1.1.1.1
tunnel protection ipsec profile dmvpn
interface Tunnel1
description ** B-VPN Tunnel **
bandwidth 100000
ip vrf forwarding red
ip address 10.0.252.5 255.255.255.252
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
ip mtu 1500
load-interval 60
tunnel source GigabitEthernet0/0 (WAN Interface)
tunnel destination 2.1.1.1
tunnel protection ipsec profile dmvpn
like the above..... shown sample...
Please rate if the given information helps!!!

Multiple dialog instances on same host for different System

Dear Sir,
I install two dialog instances on same host ,one for DEV one for QAS.
First I install dialog instance for DEV and startup with no error.
Second dialog instance for QAS install with success end ,but can not start dispatchers.
Service
sapmsDEV     3600/tcp     # SAP System Message Port
sapmsQAS     3601/tcp     # SAP System Message Port
sapdp01s 4701/tcp # SAP System Dispatcher Security Port
sapgw01s 4801/tcp    # SAP System Gateway Security Port
sapdp00       3200/tcp     # SAP System Dispatcher Port
sapdp00s 4700/tcp # SAP System Dispatcher Security Port
sapgw00       3300/tcp # SAP System Gateway Central Instance Port
sapgw00s 4800/tcp # SAP System Gateway Security Port
Disp_dev
***LOG Q0I=> NiPConnect2: SiPeekPendConn (10061: WSAECONNREFUSED: Connection refused) [nixxi.cpp 8716]
ERROR => MsIAttachEx: NiBufConnect to sap-qas/sapmsQAS failed (rc=NIECONN_REFUSED) [msxxi.c      633]
***LOG Q0L=> DpLoopInit, nomscon () [dpxxdisp.c   1549]
Stderr
D:\usr\sap\QAS\D01\work>ntscmgr start MSSQLSERVER -m sap-qas
failure: StartService, NT ErrorMessage: An instance of the service is already running. StartService SUCCESS
D:\usr\sap\QAS\D01\work>ntscmgr start SQLSERVERAGENT -m sap-qas
failure: StartService, NT ErrorMessage: An instance of the service is already running. StartService SUCCESS
It seem that first startup dialog instance already start MSSQLSERVER -m sap-dev and SQLSERVERAGENT -m sap-dev, so next instance can not start again ,and cause NICONN_REFUSED.
Could someone help me?
Thanks
Regards,
Matt

It appears to be possible, at least in IDM 7.1
The release notes and Installation guide reference a setting called waveset.serverId that you set in your application server startup script like so:
-Dwaveset.serverId=Name
This would allow each JVM to identify itself differently from any others running on the same physical server.
I haven't tried this yet myself, so caveat emptor.
Jason

How to avoid multiple users to access same tcode

Hi all,
Am creating one z tcode to display the material details for the particular reservation number. How can I avoid multiple users to access the same tcode simultaneously. If anybody works over that tcode then no other user should be able to access the same tcode until or unless the first user works over it.
Regards,
Ramya

HI,
you can even use import and export logic and check if user has entered the transaction ..
Regards,
Santosh
Message was edited by:
Santosh Kumar Patha

How to open multiple applications at the same time

I need to open several applications at the same time: Dreamweaver, BBEdit, and Acrobat. Is there a way to smooth this process, so pressing an icon in the dock will open them all for me?

You could create an applescript to do it.
tell application "Dreamweaver's Full Name"
activate
end tell
tell application "BBEdit's Full Name"
activate
end tell
tell application "Acrobat's Full Name"
activate
end tell
Replace the quoted text (leaving the quotes) with the full name of the application, and save the applescript as an application bundle, and put it in your dock.
NOTE: You may have to put the full path to the application for it to work (I.E. /Applications/Dreamweaver.app). If you do, encase the full path in quotes.
Good luck!
Message was edited by: joshz

Multiple application instances and inter process communication.

Hi,
I am looking at having a main application instance spawn individual application instances. But when launching another instance I need to message the main application so it can spawn a window.
How do I go about communicating between application instances in order to do this ?
Many thanks in advance,
Aaron

RMI is your best bet - or, if the IPC is pretty simple, then you could just open a simple socket listener in the primary app...
- K

Multiple application instance on the same server instance

Can we have multiple instances of the same application on a single WLS?? For ex, can I have two app.ear files in different application directories??

Hi Nilesh,
Can you please clarify your landscape as this will help in getting answers to your question.
In general adding instances (and/or server nodes) should be considered for increasing capacity rather than impoving performance. Specifcially, adding instances (and/or server nodes on the same host you risk a situation where the processes compete for resources which will have a negative effect on performance. If you do need to combine instances on the same host, make sure there is enough hardware (specifically memory in case of JAVA).
Hope this helps,
Best regards, Walter

Multiple IDM instances on same host

Can multiple Identity Manager app server instances be run on the same host, connecting to the same db? If so, how is this accomplished. From what I see Identity Manager instances attempt to register themselves using the host name. Is there a property in the properties file that can set a unique name?

It appears to be possible, at least in IDM 7.1
The release notes and Installation guide reference a setting called waveset.serverId that you set in your application server startup script like so:
-Dwaveset.serverId=Name
This would allow each JVM to identify itself differently from any others running on the same physical server.
I haven't tried this yet myself, so caveat emptor.
Jason

Bug - multiple related instances of same class

We've discovered a rather subtle bug in the process by which Kodo
searches for reachable related objects to persist. If an instance of a
PC class (A) has two relationships to the same PC class (B), and both
related instances of B have the same value for their PK-field, then only
one of the related instances of B will be persisted.
Obviously, this problem only occurs in the context of application
identity. We've only encountered it when all the instances involved are
newly created and being made persistent for the first time (else the
instances would have different PK-values). It should also be noted that
we're assigning PK-values in jdoPreStore(). Here's the specific
situation we encountered:
Class A has two relationships to class B, represented by fields "B b1"
and "B b2". In our case, A.b1 is the many-side of a bidirectional
one-to-many relationship; the one-side is implemented by a field "List
aList" in B. A.b2 is the navigable side of a unidirectional
relationship; there is no corresponding field in B. (We haven't checked
whether or how the cardinality or navigability of the relationships
affects the problem.)
Let "a1" be the sole instance of A. If a1.b1 is set to an instance of B
but a1.b2 is null, and makePersistent( a1 ) is called, then a1 and b1
are persisted correctly and the relation field b2_id in TableA is NULL.
However, if a1.b2 is set to a second instance of B and both instances of
B have the same initial value of their PK-field, then a.b2 is not
persisted. Only one record is added to TableB; it corresponds to A.b1.
Interestingly, in this case the relation field b2_id in TableA is not
NULL, but has the default value of b2's PK-field. jdoPreStore() is not
called on b2 and b2 is not persisted, but its PK-field is read in the
process of persisting a1.
Since we've placed the jdoPreStore() callback in a common non-persistent
adapter superclass, we're currently able to work around the problem with
a static "seed" PK value that is incremented in the superclass default
constructor to provide a unique initial value for each PK-field. If
anyone would like the code for this approach we'll post it, although
it'll become unnecessary when the problem is fixed.
Jerry Pulley
Sr. Developer
Commerce Technologies, Inc.

I'm curious what behavior, besides throwing an exception, could even be
possible. If the pm discovers two object with the same id, it seems that it
has to choose one of them to make persistent. How could it possibly resolve
differences in the fields of the two instances in deciding which one is the
correct one to put in the db? Additionally, allowing this behavior could
lead to subtle, difficult to detect bugs in your program, since ( as Abe
points out ) JDO promises that there will only be one instance of an object
with a given primary key per PM. Other code may make decisions based on
this expectation ( like refreshing one of the objects after making a change
in a different PM ), that would lead to problems for code still hanging on
to the second instance.
IMHO, it should throw an exception.
-Eric
"Abe White" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Thanks for the bug report! However, I'm not entirely sure that this is a
bug (at least not the bug you think it is); either way it's an extremely
interesting case. The reason I say it might not be a bug is thatassigning
pk values in jdoPreStore seems suspect.
We know that a single PM cannot at any time contain multiple instances
with the same oid value, app id or otherwise. This is obvious from the
getObjectById method -- only one object can have a particular oid.
We also know that jdoPreStore is called only for instances managed by a
PM (duh!).
Thus it should not be possible to see a case where jdoPreStore is
called for 2 objects with the same initial oid.
Now, I realize that when you're dealing with persistence-by-reachability
things become less clear. However, I think the general point stands: at
the time that the objects are made persistent they all must have unique
oid values, and objects must be made persistent before jdoPreStore is
called.
Technically we could get around this. The current
persistence-by-reachability algorithm is something like:
flushed = {}
while flushed.size < persistent.size:
for each persistent instance:
if instance not in flushed:
instance.jdoPreStore // may persist more instances
instance.persistFirstClassFields // may persist more too
flushed += instance
In sum this is a breadth-first method of persisting relations. It could
be changed to a depth-first system instead of persisting all first class
fields each one is persisted and then immediately the algorithm is
repeated for that object before the other fields are touched. However,
this seems like it might lead to other unexpected behavior.
Generally, it just seems like waiting till jdoPreStore to assign the oid
of an object seems like a bad idea. I think the real bug is that Kodo is
not throwing an exception as soon as 2 object with the same oid are
detected (currently it just lets one overwrite the other in the cache,
which results in the behavior you see).
Does anyone else have an opinion on this? I'm certainly not fixed on my
interpretation of things; if you disagree I'd be very interested in
hearing other arguments.

Multiple Application Instances Accessing Same DAQ Device

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for