>So, what was the original reason for not using normal subVI calls, are the reasons still valid, are the large numbers needed? When you talk >about reaching a limit, what is the type and size of data, and how many calls are we talking about per second?
>I know that I'm asking questions rather than answering, but at this stage, I think a good question is better than a lame answer.
We have an architect were we can build up a program very quickly. One component supports one idea. We launch a top level component which launches supporting components. Example: the top level may launce Mettler Scale Component, MFC control Component, Pressure Check Component. These components have supporting components. The MFC component may have four or five individual MFC's it controls.
On top of this, each component has views associated with them. The CBR gives use the ability to run it or not based on an excel sheet entry.
All views use the invoke node to update the indicator ad controls. This is a proven system, but now people are really pushing it.
We have many I/O cards in the computers and many components. These systems are very complex and are pretty impressive to any LabView programmer. We have just hit a wall because of the size of these systems that are being created. Yesterday I look at a system with 1390 ish VI's.
I think a little more care needs to be given to the throughput via CBR.
