P_sequencer / m_sequencer

In reply to dave_59:

Hi dave,

I need your vision to understand p_sequencer use cases:

I learn from various group posts that when we have requirement of modifying the sequencer we can use the p_sequencer of type specific.

I read your para about different sequencer A and B and type casting. So when we have requirement in which we want to add certain methods other than base class, we can use the p_sequencer.

My impression about sequencers are that we never modify the sequencer. At most sometimes we need to get configuration to access which can be access by config db from test.

So I believe m_sequencer + config db always fulfills the requirements.

Is there any specific case where we have to use p_sequencer? Please give idea if you have any specific case where only p_sequencer can work. I understood that m_sequencer is always dose the required job then why the feature of p_sequencer is there. I know there should be but curious to get clear use case.

Also I’m not sure how p_sequencer compromise the reputability?
I need help to understand that.

Detailed answer appreciated. Most of the time your answers helps :)

Thanks,
Geet