LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Community Browser
Top Authors
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

Several users of XNET miss an important function from the driver: to read signals' logical value from the database.

For example, the value of 1 means 'Initialized', 0 means 'not initialized'. We would like to read those strings.

 

See this thread.

The Run Method is pretty much the only option we have in LabVIEW to scale an application dynamically by instantiating new VIs - but there is one big catch - for some reason it requires the unser interface to be idle(!).

 

Related methods like setting control values e.g. do not have this requirement so they do not pose a problem - but the main method for dynamic instantiation does - and can be blocked by something as simple as a user that opens the calendar view of a date and time control (which of course never should do this either, but that's another issue/idea).

 

Personally I use the run method to create new trend windows (you never know how many trends a user wants to see at the same time), create session handlers for remote clients etc. The times it is used to actually create user interfaces it is not a big problem that the run method is in the user interface thread, but for session handlers and other things that needs to be created in the background based on requests from the outside? A HUGE issue.

To support modern web thin clients, the LabVIEW webservice needs to support the OPTIONS request. When a web browser makes a cross origin request there are a few rules that the response must comply with before the browser will provide with the result to the web application. The OPTIONS request is needed to respond to these requests.

 

A cross origin request is any request where an application running on one domain needs to make a request to another domain. For example, if there was a javascript application running on the domain www.labview.com and it needed to make a AJAX request to api.labview.com, the browser considers this a cross origin request. This is a common setup when the thin client is being hosted by one server, and the webservice is being hosted by another server. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/CORS

 

Depending on the request, the browser may issue a "preflight" request. "Standard" requests are GET and POST requests without custom header fields only require the response has an additional headers. Other requests (PUT, DELETE, GET w/ headers, POST w/ headers) require a preflight request. A preflight request is an OPTIONS request. If the OPTIONS request doesn't get an appropriate response, the browser will not even make the actual request. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Preflight_request

 

For example, I'm starting an application and here's how I'd like it setup.

 

1. Windows PC. This is the central server for the application. There will be a normal LabVIEW application running on this computer. There will also be a web service run on this computer. The web service will mainly host a web application written using HTML/CSS/Javascript (although it could be written using HTML vis from NXG).

 

2. A bunch of CRIOs. These CRIOs will also host their own web service to get system information, measurements, and diagnostics. As new CRIOs are commissioned, they'll report to the Windows PC.

 

Now a user uses their web browser to access to the windows PC. The Javascript Application (which is hosted on the Windows web service) provides the user with a list of all commissioned CRIOs. They then click on one and the javascript application starts to make requests directly to the CRIO's web service. Since these CRIO's are on a separate IP address, the browser flags this as a CORS request. This means that an OPTIONS request can be sent. Since I can't handle an OPTIONS request in a LabVIEW web service, I can't implement this.

 

This is just one example. Another case would be an Apache hosted web application hosted on an Amazon EC2 needs to make requests to a LabVIEW web service running in a different domain. Basically any time a web application (AKA something running in the browser) needs to communicate with a LabVIEW web service you'll run into this problem.

The current implementation for remote debugging needs two ports to be opened on a stand-alone firewall in between.

  • Port 3580 to connect to the NI service locator on the target machine
  • A random port for the application on the target to connect to
    This port is dynamically assigned to the application by asking the OS for a free one

 

This dynamic port cannot be pre-configured on the stand-alone firewall except by opening up the whole port rang above 1024.

The latter is something no IT person with any sense of security will do !

 

So we need to be able to pre-configure a certain port for the target application, so that we can open a dedicated port for this connection on the firewall as well.

Otherwise this whole remote debugging feature is useless to many companies.

 

There have been multiple cases in the last few years where customers (huge ones) have come across this issue. 

NXG needs an Idea Exchange.  The feedback button is a lame excuse for a replacement.  Why?

 

  • I can't tell if my idea has been suggested before.  (And maybe someone else's suggestion is BETTER and I want to sign onto it, instead.)
  • NI has to slog through bunches of similar feedback submissions to determine whether or not they are the same thing.
  • Many ideas start out as unfocused concepts that are honed razor sharp by the community.
  • This is an open loop feedback system.

Let's make an Idea Exchange for NXG!

In the current LabVIEW XML Schema, the flatten to XML string supports variants, but not variant attributes (and by extension waveform attributes as well). This is unfortunate as variant attributes remain one of the best ways of implementing a dictionary type data structure and they are also a useful way of adding additional metadata to waveform signals. In both cases, serializing the attributes to XML strings properly would greatly facilitate data exchange with non LabVIEW code.

Hi all,

 

After some issues spending 1 week to get HTTP embedded server working in LV for a single application, I have some remarks that might trigger some need to a more flexible, simple and open HTTP configuration. The current implementation of a HTTP server is quite limited and outdated to my opinion.

First thing is the NI Web Server. This is a nice feature, however, NI recommends using it rather then the outdated Application Web Server but the problem is that this thing is only a single server running on a single port (for every application executable). Good enough for a single web server on a host using a web browser but how about implementing a LV HTTP server for each application (e.g. RPC server)? To my knowledge, every other programming language (e.g. Python, C++, ...) has a core implementation for this.

I have spent a lot of time to see what the best solution is for implementing a HTTP server belonging to a single application executable in LV. This executable is typically a application GUI or a backend service in our projects and we have a lot of them. Every application needs its own RPC server (running on a different port) and hence running its own RPC methods and I ended up implementing a Web Service using a LV Application Web Server, I can't see other ways at this moment using core LV functionality without the need for additional packages to install.

I also miss the enabling and disabling of the HTTP server during runtime. As in our project applications, we also have other transport layers for implementing RPC, such as zeroMQ (thanks to Martijn Jasperse's library on VIPM) and TCP (native built-in to LV). I would like to run only one of these transport services by configuration but here is a second problem here, once the application is running, the HTTP Web Service automatically registers and there is no controlled way for disabling it during runtime, which gives me headaches since I have to change the port number as another transport layer cannot use the same port as the HTTP server. One might say to built another application (actor based) exe and implement the Web Service from there in a different actor but this is a pain in the *** to have 2 exe's for each single application. Why can't the HTTP Web Service not switched OFF and ON again, both in development and runtime? I found a property node to disable the server but it apparently doesn't work (seems related to the native panel web server).

One of the major disadvantages that I also encountered is the HTTP methods that are programmed in a single VI and there is no way to pass data to these method VI's (like using actor framework or even classes in general). It seems we have to use FGV's (Functional Global Variables) to share data between my main application actor and these HTTP method VI's itself. Even then, the HTTP Service Request refnum is only valid in the HTTP method VI itself, once it finished executing, the refnum is flushed and not valid anymore, so no way to pass this refnum using actor framework messages to my application actors. That's quite frustrating since I have to use notifiers within the HTTP method VI's instead as a plan B backup solution signifying that the method VI can proceed and finish its execution once it Wait on Notifier function is complete (since I want to send an answer from my application actors, not from the HTTP method itself)!

Another issue I observed is that I can't "Start" the HTTP Web Service from the right-click menu in the project explorer, it simply crashes with some dubious error that the 'system is currently in an invalid state for the current message'. What does this mean, no clue from NI help docs?

 

Arrowin_0-1715670098941.png

 

I can only right-click and select "Start (Debug Server)" to make it work (but on the debug port 8001 by default). All other options just fail, the same for "Publish", it simply doesn't work in my LV2020 SP1 (32-bit) version and I have no clue why as there is not a single error message at all!

Also, why must we use MS Silverlight to control application webservers from LV? Silverlight is deprecated and I ended up using MS Edge in "Internet Explorer" mode to get the config page working (after spending another two hours to find out). Even then, some config panes just show up with error dialogs and no way to see active services being registered by the application HTTP web server. In the end I just used TCP View to see active services running. It is always frustrating to use third party apps to do simple things.

 

As you might notice from this message, I suffered a lot of days to figure out how to implement HTTP in a simple decent way using LV's core HTTP functionality. I wonder if this will be better using LV 2024 Q1?
If anyone has ideas on how to properly configure multiple application HTTP servers for each application on different ports while controlling itself, please share it with me. I am open to any idea's and wonder if there are other solutions for HTTP implementation (not using 3rd party packages). To my opinion, HTTP should be easy and open to configure properly in LV without a lot of current non-working Web Server issues.
Please note that I tried to reinstall the NI Web Server and other web service related stuff using NI package manager but no avail.

 

Best Regards,

Davy Anthonissen

 Connecting to remote panels using LabVIEW is difficult if private networks, local private and external public IPs (under NAT), and firewalls, etc. are involved. It requires significant knowledge as well as external networking configurations (port forwarding, etc.), and possibly admin privileges to modify those.

 

There are plenty of companies that have found a way around all this. The prime example is chrome remote desktop, which seamlessly works even if target computers are in hidden locations on private networks, as long as each machine can access the internet with an outgoing UDP connection. The way I understand it, each computer registers with the Google server, which in turn patches the two outgoing connections together in a way that both will communicate directly afterwards. All traffic tunnels inside the plain Google chat protocol (udp based). Similar mechanisms have been developed for security systems (example) and many more.

 

Since the bulk of the traffic is directly between the endpoints, the traffic load on the external connection management server is very minimal. It simply keeps an updated list of active nodes and handles the patching if requested.

 

I envision a very similar mechanism where LabVIEW users can associate all their applications and distributed computers with a given user ID (e.g. ni profile), and, at all times be able to get a list of all currently running remote systems published under that user ID. If we want to connect to one of them, the connection server would patch things together without the need of any networking configuration. Optionally, users could publish any given panel under a public key, that can be distributed to allow public connections by any other LabVIEW user.

 

This is a very general idea. Details of the best implementation would need to be worked out. Thanks for voting!

 

If you are using TCP to communicate to a different code environment, you may want to set some of the socket options. For example, for responsive control, you will want to disable Nagle's algorithm. There is currently no obvious or easy way to do this. TCP Get Raw Net Object.vi in <vi.lib>\utility\tcp.llb will provide the raw socket ID, but you then need to call setsockopt() on your particular platform using the call library node. You can do this with the code provide here. A much better way would be adding a property node to the TCP reference that allowed you to set and query the options directly.

It would be nice if we had the option to terminate a TCP Read on a single character rather than only a CR/LF. There are many times where you would terminate a read on some end character such as a 0x03 (ETX). In order to accomplish this now we need to have a tight loop which reads from the connection a single byte at a time. Even better would be if we could specify a string as the termination sequence. However, I would be happy with a single character option.

When you are generating data from a source and sending it across a TCP connection, it would be useful to be able to get information about when packets are being dropped and resent in the connection. If lots of drops are being detected, a program might be able to slow down the data acquisition or take other action to reduce the amount of information being transmitted to account for the lower bandwidth connection. Currently there is no way to get this information from the TCP primitives.

 

This idea comes out of the Certified LabVIEW Architect Summit held yesterday and today at NI headquarters in Austin, TX.

 

Currently the only way to set/modify Tcp socket options is by directly calling some system library, as done for example in this post.

 

This not only causes code difficult to understand ("what does that library call do again?") but also poses problems when you want to use your code on different operating systems: Currently the only way to do this is using "conditional disable structures", and then Labview still tries to load the code used for a different operating system...

 

Labview should have a standard way to set socket options within Labview code, at least for the most important options (Nagle algorithm leaps to mind...). This could either be done as additional inputs to the "Tcp open connection"-VI, or (much better) using property nodes for Tcp connections.

 

So one can set many of the standard properties for VISA connections.  However the serial port latency setting is not one of these.  It can easily be set by a standard POSIX ioctl call for both linux and MacOS (who the heck knows how Windows does it).  Many character based devices can be manipulated through these ioctl calls.

 

To be specific, the FTDI USB-Serial port driver chips used in MANY devices as a USB interface or just as a serial port have a slow default latency that is fine for preserving CPU cycles but not great for modern high speed custom communication.

 

1. Just add a a property that sets the serial port latency using an ioctl IOSSDATALAT property configuration.

 

2. More generally allow an interface that will call ioctl with a supplied property and the LV programmer can pass the correct property configuration.

 

3. Less satisfying but possibly easier to implement is to have the VISA property be the file descriptor number.  This simplifies the programming where one has to now get the "Name" property and then search the process information table for that "Name" (or really path) and then extract the file descriptor.  Only then can one set the latency for that device.

 

The current bluetooth VIs (as of LV 2014) don't support communication with the new protocol Bluetooth 4.0, referred as Bluetooth Low Energy (or Bluetooth Smart).

 

New VIs dedicated to BLE or adding support on current VIs is needed for all developers of this new bluetooth stack.

 

When using the Sahred variable (SV) with "Bind to source", the SV uses the datatype of its source.

If you are using the datatype "double" you can see all fractional digits.

That doesn't make sense all the time - e.g. if you want to display temperature values.

 

Our idea is to give the user the opportunity of controlling the number of digit of precision.

 

Digits of precision.jpg

 

Thanks

I would like to see the functionality of the TCP and UDP primitives expanded to include more state information, better control of the connections and the capability to receive events for the connection.

 

Items that I can see which would be helpful would include the following:

  1. Ability to enable/disable the Nagling algorithm.
  2. Ability to abort a TCP connection with a TCP-RST. (The wire is there on the TCP-Close primitive but it doesn't do anything)
  3. Ability to receive an event when data is present.
  4. Ability to receive an event when the data has actually be put on the wire. (Currently the write VIs return as soon as the data is buffered. There is no ability to have the application wait until the data is actually delivered.)
  5. More access to the IOCTLs that are available on a socket connection that a programmer has access to via Linux or Windows socket libraries.

As we increasingly integrate with HTTP servers the LabVIEW functions appear more and more limited.

 

Authentication is a major concern and in enterprise environments one option is NTLM (or Windows Authentication).

 

I would like to see the HTTP client support this as in this case we had to abandon using LabVIEW for the integration.

When using the LabVIEW Internet Toolkit FTP library to transfer large files, there is no way to determine the progress.

 

I propose a notifier be added to the FTP Registry object data. This notifier would be updated by the low level TCP Read Stream and TCP Write Stream vis and monitored by a UI to display progress of the transfer.

 

See this NI Forum post...

 

FTP transfer progress bar

http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=170&message.id=470946 

 

 

 

 

The current low level implementation of TCP functions only accesses a data stream, but not the raw data of the tcp telegram. It would be nice to have a low level TCP "Read/Write Telegram" function to get additional information from header or footer, like time stamps. Maybe as a buffered stream, like the current functions.

 

The resulting cluster could look something like this:

http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/about/ac123/ac147/downloads/customer/internetprotocoljournal/ipj_3-2/images/figure01.gif

HTML5 supports WebSockets which allows low-latency, two-way communication between browser and server.  There are various screen-sharing technologies in existence based on this, but integrating a similar server in LabVIEW would enable capabilities that could be accessed from any desktop or mobile browser, no configuration required on the client side.  The key to this feature is the ability to configure the server and enable sharing from within LabVIEW or from a VI (i.e. a LabVIEW-aware server).

 

An idea of what this could do:

  • Remote control of LabVIEW development machine

remoteaccess_composite.png 

 

  • Selective sharing of windows, for instance allowing interaction with only LabVIEW windows.  The server application would have a mechanism for selecting which of the open windows to share.

app selection.png

  • A view-only mode so users could check the status of a running application from anywhere, including their cell phone.

 

remoteaccess_fo.png 

  • A brat or Express VI that when dropped in a VI would automatically share the VI when run.
  • Third-party toolkits and applications could build in sharing capability for their own app using the API.

 

This feature would be more powerful than Remote Panels in that:

  • It would give access to the LabVIEW development environment in addition to running applications.
  • No configuration or special software required on the client side, enabling multiple platforms including mobile.