Just a few queries that I hope someone here has a better understanding than I do.
I currently have a Fastrack Supreme 10, running on firmware 6.63g and it’s got an IESM GPS chipset.
It’s programmed to collect GPS data every 30 seconds, and in the interval, there is a GPIO that might be triggered to cause GPS data to be sent earlier as well. Due to the nature of the solution, there are several cases where GPRS is out of range, and the data will not be sent back to the server (TCP/IP), this data’s are stored in flash.
I currently have 3 flash handles
FlashRetVal = adl_flhSubscribe("StoreForward", 2000); FlashRetVal = adl_flhSubscribe("StoredCount",1); FlashRetVal = adl_flhSubscribe("SentCount",1);
StoreForward will be the flash that handles the GPS data.
StoredCount is the flash that will handle the object ID that it has been stored till. So let’s say we have 200 data stored in the flash, the StoreCount will keep track of the value 200, and SentCount is the flash handle that indicates till which index the GPS data has been sent from flash.
Here my predicament truly lies. Every time a GPS data is written in the flash, the StoredCount will have to be updated as well, and it is constantly written on the same object.
FlashRetVal = adl_flhWrite((ascii*)currentStoredCount, 0, 4, storedCount);
I’ve re-read the ADL documentation but I am still unsure whether it is considered as one erasure cycle. I’ve put a constant size on the object just to be sure it doesn’t fire up the garbage collector. So, does this one operation constitutes to the erasure cycle? Because if it does, I have to re-implement another method to do this, as it will dry off that 100,000 in 100 days or so. (Two flash handlers btw).
My other question will be this. It says in the documentation that one handler can subscribe to 2000 objects, but how big of an object can it store?
Like at the moment, im subscribing to 2000 objects, and each time the GPS data is stored, it’s about 80-100 bytes at most. So will this be feasible or will a problem persist?
I’ve tried ADL with the previous implementation but the re-compact sometimes messes things up