Why does reconnect recount an FR5 completion already in our history?

TheoAbbott0062 · 27 Feb 2026, 21:03 UTC

Reply to discussion
TH
TheoAbbott0062
Our durable history already contains the sample bracket's completed attempt. Nevertheless, the FR5 inspection monitor adds another completion when it reconnects and sees the PLC's retained completion high. I have kept the retained state and both monitor entries for the programmer. The remaining question is where the reconnect path stops consulting the history it successfully uses during normal operation.

18 replies

AD
AdaAbbott0042
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

Does reconnect rebuild a temporary list of seen attempts? An empty list at that point would fit what you describe, although the programmer needs to check the actual path.

11 points
TH
TheoAbbott0062
Replying to AdaAbbott0042

It does rebuild that list. The normal event handler consults durable history, but the reconnect handler starts with an empty local set and increments before adding the attempt to it.

2 points
JU
JuliaAllen0326
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

Is the second completion written as another durable event, or is only the displayed total wrong? I would not assume the same correction covers both.

9 points
TH
ThomasBarnes0538
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

Two handlers deciding whether work is new sounds like the thing to remove. Let reconnect present the retained result to the same reconciliation path as a normal arrival.

-5 points
PR
PriyaBarnes0568
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

Can the operator see that it is the same attempt?

20 points
TH
TheoAbbott0062
Replying to PriyaBarnes0568

Julia, a second receipt entry is saved, but it refers to the same completed attempt. The inflated count is in the monitor. Priya, the detailed view shows the identity; the large total does not explain its increase.

2 points
BL
BlakeBailey
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

I would keep receipt entries, even repeated ones. They can explain a reconnect incident. The display total should be derived from completed attempts, not how often their information reached the monitor.

7 points
CH
ChloeBrooks0831
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

Did closing and reopening the monitor restore the correct total?

9 points
AD
AdaAbbott0042
Replying to BlakeBailey

Blake, agreed about keeping the receipts. I would also make the repeated receipt visible as such, so somebody reading the detailed log does not think two bracket inspections occurred.

10 points
TH
TheoAbbott0062
Replying to ChloeBrooks0831

Chloe, a full reopen did restore it because that path loaded the completed attempts. The programmer has now routed reconnect through the same reconciliation used on normal arrival. Our retained-completion replay leaves the total unchanged.

6 points
JU
JuliaAllen0326
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

What happens when an attempt completes during the outage and is therefore absent from that history when the connection drops? That must still appear once after reconnect.

13 points
TH
ThomasBarnes0538
Replying to JuliaAllen0326

And replay that newly recovered completion twice. Fixing the old attempt case should not depend on an event having existed before the outage.

2 points
PR
PriyaBarnes0568
Replying to JuliaAllen0326

Please make the operator message plain. 'Recovered completion' beats an unexplained number changing.

11 points
TH
TheoAbbott0062
Replying to ThomasBarnes0538

The outage-completion case now adds one completed attempt. A repeated receipt adds no further count. We also tested an unresolved attempt with no result: it stays unresolved and creates no new submission.

25 points
CH
ChloeBrooks0831
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

Thank you. Was that the installed monitor or a separate test screen?

13 points
BL
BlakeBailey
Replying to PriyaBarnes0568

Priya's message suggestion helps, but I would avoid making every ordinary receipt a notification. Show the recovery when it matters, and leave the detailed receipt trail available for investigation.

9 points
TH
TheoAbbott0062
Replying to ChloeBrooks0831

Chloe, we repeated those cases in the installed monitor with the application owner. The count remained correct through reconnect and reopening. Blake and Priya, recovered completions have an explanatory entry; repeated receipts stay in detail without another completion notice.

25 points
AD
AdaAbbott0042
Replying to TheoAbbott0062

That is a useful repair account. The repeated receipt remains explainable, and the person on shift no longer has to subtract imaginary brackets.

15 points

Add to the discussion

Welcome to Application Robot

Everyone can read the forum. Sign in or create an account to start a discussion, reply, or upload photos.

Forgot your password?

By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.