Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chan config lists of channels #110

Open
ggmarshall opened this issue Feb 17, 2025 · 4 comments
Open

chan config lists of channels #110

ggmarshall opened this issue Feb 17, 2025 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@ggmarshall
Copy link
Contributor

It would be nice to be able to specify the same channel config for a list of tables so don't have to pass each in individually, also could mean they all use the same processing chain instead of having to rebuild each time?

@ggmarshall
Copy link
Contributor Author

I guess this would be difficult as the database values are substituted when building the proc chain?

@iguinn
Copy link
Collaborator

iguinn commented Feb 18, 2025

Yeah, I've had the same thought. Would wildcards be reasonable here for the channel names? This would be pretty easy to implement

Basically then you'd have:

"ch1*/raw": "the GED config",
"ch2*/raw": "the SIPm config"

Not sure if I have that all right. I think this would probably require us to define behavior for a channel name that matches multiple wildcards...But if we are careful, that could actually give us a good way to override behaviors:

"ch12345678": "some special confg",
"ch1*": "the normal config",
...

@ggmarshall
Copy link
Contributor Author

ggmarshall commented Feb 18, 2025

For us the sipm and ged channels are mixed together so would be hard to separate by wildcards I think

Edit: think all sipms start with same start so yes if we could essentially define wildcard hierarchies then could work

@iguinn iguinn added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 18, 2025
@ggmarshall
Copy link
Contributor Author

But I agree wildcards would be the cleanest solution

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants