Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2016


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 113025
interpreted = N
texte = 613
It=E2=80=99s actually = called a bitwise operation - for geek history buffs. Let=E2=80=99s say = you have 5 different conditions you=E2=80=99re monitoring (I=E2=80=99m = just picking a random number of random tests):

1) temp above limit
2) ping fail
3)= http fail
4) dns fail
5) disk space = alarm

First, all of these must be yes/no, = binary conditions.  For temp limits, the set point and control loop = are elsewhere, this just looks at the resulting alarm as true/false.

If I put those conditions into a single field = called conditions, and none are in alarm, the result would simply be = five zeros. If any one condition alarms, the position of that number = would indicate what condition failed. if #1, 2, & 3 were all in = alarm, the result would 11100, or 7, in base 10.

You can either create a db to store all 32 possible different = combinations of alarms:

value= temppinghttpdnsspace
0fffff
1= t= f= f= f= f
2ftfff
etc.

You can write a function to trigger = whenever the [conditiona] variable is greater than zero, then lookup the = base 10 value of [conditions] in that db to see what the alarms are.

But because the data is = stored in binary, you can use a much quicker process to figure out which = conditions are in alarm. Take a look at the [listchars] command. You can do this:

[listchars = chars=3D[conditions]]
[index]: [char]
[/listchars]

That produces:

1: = 1
2: = 1
3: = 1
4: = 0
5: = 0

And, if you just store a = simple list of numbered alarms, the lookup happens in a fraction of the = time because your alarm db only has as many entries as alarms, rather = than all possible combinations.



On Sep 30, 2016, at 12:23 PM, dale = <dtherio@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Patrick,

Interesting idea. = I've not tried that in the past. Any possible examples of how you would = do that? It definitely sounds like a good way to go.

Thank you,

Dale

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Patrick = McCormick <duganmccormick@gmail.com> wrote:
I = think you should store each alarm condition as one bit in a binary = number long enough to accommodate all alarm conditions.  Then, each = base 10 value of that binary number represents a unique alarm or = combination of alarms.


> = On Sep 29, 2016, at 6:42 PM, dale <dtherio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I searched the talk archives, though = I probably didn't use the proper search terms.
>
> The system for work I will be building is kind of like a = fleet management system. It isn't tracking the vehicles, but a computer = and camera system we install and maintain on the vehicles.
>
> One of the things I wanted to do is = to put the various problem codes (e.g. C HD PCB SSD) in a single field = separated by a comma. My thought is that it would be easier to search = for systems that had a specific problem and/or combination of = problems.
>
> As it has been a few = years since coding in WebDNA, I'm not sure if this is the best way or = not. We do come up with new codes as time passes based on new = systems.
>
> Would you recommend using = a single field for various codes as listed above where I would only have = to change the searches or using a hdr file to make adding additional = codes a bit easier?
>
> I really = haven't searched for multiple bits of data in a single field before.
>
> Ways in which this would be used:
> Someone checking the systems remotely would enter the = code for that system
> Techs fixing the system would = need to remove the appropriate codes for what they fixed
> Running reports to determine which systems have certain = issues
>
> Additionally, each time the = techs create a service ticket to make a repair, I will save a copy of = the the status of the system along with their notes in a history = database so we will have a life-cycle of the system. Those records = would only be editable by certain admin accounts.
>
> Thank you in advance for any recommendations as to the = best way to handle this.
>
> Dale
>
> = --------------------------------------------------------- This message = is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To = unsubscribe, E-mail to: = archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug = Reporting: support@webdna.us

---------------------------------------------------------
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <talk@webdna.us>.
To = unsubscribe, E-mail to: <talk-leave@webdna.us>
archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us
Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us

--------------------------------------------------------- = This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the = mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail = to: archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug= Reporting: support@webdna.us

= --------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us . Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (Patrick McCormick 2016)
  2. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use multiple fields for each bit of data? ("C. Frank Wofle" 2016)
  3. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use multiple fields for each bit of data? (Grant Hulbert 2016)
  4. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (Kenneth Grome 2016)
  5. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (dale 2016)
  6. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (Patrick McCormick 2016)
  7. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use multiple fields for each bit of data? (christophe.billiottet@webdna.us 2016)
  8. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (Patrick McCormick 2016)
  9. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (dale 2016)
  10. Re: [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use (Patrick McCormick 2016)
  11. [WebDNA] Searching for multiple bits of data in one field or use multiple (dale 2016)
613
It=E2=80=99s actually = called a bitwise operation - for geek history buffs. Let=E2=80=99s say = you have 5 different conditions you=E2=80=99re monitoring (I=E2=80=99m = just picking a random number of random tests):

1) temp above limit
2) ping fail
3)= http fail
4) dns fail
5) disk space = alarm

First, all of these must be yes/no, = binary conditions.  For temp limits, the set point and control loop = are elsewhere, this just looks at the resulting alarm as true/false.

If I put those conditions into a single field = called conditions, and none are in alarm, the result would simply be = five zeros. If any one condition alarms, the position of that number = would indicate what condition failed. if #1, 2, & 3 were all in = alarm, the result would 11100, or 7, in base 10.

You can either create a db to store all 32 possible different = combinations of alarms:

value= temppinghttpdnsspace
0fffff
1= t= f= f= f= f
2ftfff
etc.

You can write a function to trigger = whenever the [conditiona] variable is greater than zero, then lookup the = base 10 value of [conditions] in that db to see what the alarms are.

But because the data is = stored in binary, you can use a much quicker process to figure out which = conditions are in alarm. Take a look at the [listchars] command. You can do this:

[listchars = chars=3D[conditions]]
[index]: [char]
[/listchars]

That produces:

1: = 1
2: = 1
3: = 1
4: = 0
5: = 0

And, if you just store a = simple list of numbered alarms, the lookup happens in a fraction of the = time because your alarm db only has as many entries as alarms, rather = than all possible combinations.



On Sep 30, 2016, at 12:23 PM, dale = <dtherio@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Patrick,

Interesting idea. = I've not tried that in the past. Any possible examples of how you would = do that? It definitely sounds like a good way to go.

Thank you,

Dale

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Patrick = McCormick <duganmccormick@gmail.com> wrote:
I = think you should store each alarm condition as one bit in a binary = number long enough to accommodate all alarm conditions.  Then, each = base 10 value of that binary number represents a unique alarm or = combination of alarms.


> = On Sep 29, 2016, at 6:42 PM, dale <dtherio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I searched the talk archives, though = I probably didn't use the proper search terms.
>
> The system for work I will be building is kind of like a = fleet management system. It isn't tracking the vehicles, but a computer = and camera system we install and maintain on the vehicles.
>
> One of the things I wanted to do is = to put the various problem codes (e.g. C HD PCB SSD) in a single field = separated by a comma. My thought is that it would be easier to search = for systems that had a specific problem and/or combination of = problems.
>
> As it has been a few = years since coding in WebDNA, I'm not sure if this is the best way or = not. We do come up with new codes as time passes based on new = systems.
>
> Would you recommend using = a single field for various codes as listed above where I would only have = to change the searches or using a hdr file to make adding additional = codes a bit easier?
>
> I really = haven't searched for multiple bits of data in a single field before.
>
> Ways in which this would be used:
> Someone checking the systems remotely would enter the = code for that system
> Techs fixing the system would = need to remove the appropriate codes for what they fixed
> Running reports to determine which systems have certain = issues
>
> Additionally, each time the = techs create a service ticket to make a repair, I will save a copy of = the the status of the system along with their notes in a history = database so we will have a life-cycle of the system. Those records = would only be editable by certain admin accounts.
>
> Thank you in advance for any recommendations as to the = best way to handle this.
>
> Dale
>
> = --------------------------------------------------------- This message = is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To = unsubscribe, E-mail to: = archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug = Reporting: support@webdna.us

---------------------------------------------------------
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <talk@webdna.us>.
To = unsubscribe, E-mail to: <talk-leave@webdna.us>
archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us
Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us

--------------------------------------------------------- = This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the = mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail = to: archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug= Reporting: support@webdna.us

= --------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us . Patrick McCormick

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

Cookie Crumble (1998) PSC recommends what date format yr 2000??? (1997) Using Applescript to process WebCatalog functions (1998) InternetWeek E-Commerce article (1998) ReturnRaw and redirect one last question (1997) Adding a donation amount (2000) WebCat2b13MacPlugin - [math][date][/math] problem (1997) Conversion Database Blues (2001) embedded [showif] statements (2000) WebCat2b13MacPlugIn - [include] doesn't allow creator (1997) PIXO Support (1997) Frames and WebCat (1997) Experience with creating real dynamic solutions?????? (1998) Unix DB Permission Error (2002) AOL access problems (1998) date format (another question) (2000) Email Formatting (1998) [WebDNA] hide [DOS] command strings on resulting page (2016) WebCat/Typhoon Status under Windows (1998) MASTER_STORE revision (2002)