Our housing check timed out, the application restarted under the same job name, and now someone wants to attach a late acknowledgement to the newer attempt because its timestamp is closer; with Python, PLC and controller clocks disagreeing, what actually links it?
Which FR5 attempt owns this acknowledgement after the job name was reused?
MinaBrown0946 · 14 Mar 2026, 13:55 UTC
1 reply
Replying to MinaBrown0946
Look for an identity shared by the request and acknowledgement, plus source-session information; keep each log's local order intact, but if the only common detail is that reused job name, say the ownership is unresolved rather than choosing the nearest clock reading.
10pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .