mprove PI AF Analysis Handling in PI System Explorer when working with hundreds of analysis with following features:

• Possibility to sort Analysis/Analysis Templates in alphabetic order by Status, Element, Name, Template




• Possibility to filter Analysis by Status, Element, Name, Template, Backfilling




• Select all filters Analysis to Start/Stop and Start Backfilling
  Problem is when a certain set of a analyses are selected so they will be handled in one go. It is not possible to group the required ones in a contiguous section of lines in the PSE Management Add-In, manual selection is taking very much time.




• Stop Backfilling for all selected Analysis !!!
  This is needed when a backfill is started and takes a long time, but during that period it is encountered that an expression correction is needed.

Request : Being able to show Attribute values from other Elements other than the attributes on the Referenced Element for the Message in Notification 2016.

Description : From the old version, it was possible for a notification message to display a value not only the target element but also an attribute of other elements (by browsing down elements and selecting the attribute)

In the 2016 version, it does not allow for the user to choose attributes in other elements but only the attributes of the Referenced (or targeted) Element.

The screenshot (Attached file) shows a relative path of an attribute but this is when the user already had a notification rule on the previous version and migrated it. Newly created notification does not have this feature.

Originally posted on PI Square at https://pisquare.osisoft.com/ideas/5538-easily-deploying-and-maintaining-af-objects-in-multiple-remote-af-databases

Today, one of the method that can be used to selectively reconcile object changes (including templates, analyses, UOM, etc.) between source and destination servers is using Excel (in order to keep track of object changes and/or object deletions). However, it is very time-consuming and prone to errors.
 
Inspired in the current project I am working on (containing a central AF server and remote AF servers), it would be great to have a tool that allowed us to deploy and maintain all types of AF objects in a selective way in multiple remote AF servers.
 
Here is a use case:
 
The user selects the desired source objects (templates, elements, analyses, enumerations, UOMs, etc.) and export (or "publish") them to several destinations, at once, after of the press of a button (instead of “live” sync). The user selects what to be exported or synchronized to each destination, and not necessarily the same group of objects would be exported/sync to all destinations: each destination may contain different set of elements and templates.The synchronization would support name changes, object additions and deletions (similar to what is available in PI System Connector today)The user should be warned if he tries to export an element that depends on an enumeration or UOM () that is not included in the object set being exported.The user should be optionally warned about the attributes, analyses, etc. that will be deleted from the destination databases, if the corresponding ones have been deleted from the source templates or elements.The user should be able reconcile tag name changes: if the tag name convention is changed in the source attribute set with auto-tag creation, the tags created at the destination should be renamed as per new substitution parameters string.User should be able to save/load different export scenarios. 
() You may ask: why not export the entire UOM? The answer is because the source server may be a development server and may contain UOMs that were added for other type of industries, which would be irrelevant in some production environments.

We have come across a number of occasions where we want to bring in the last good value of an attribute as an input to an analytics.  But there is no way to do this without additional attributes and analytics.  It would be convenient if a function existed that brought in the last good value of the attribute.  This is particularly useful when your data source is known to send NULL value frequent which translate into No Data or Bad Input.  One specific example:

We have a number of analytics that only run if one of our engine is on.  But the SCADA system we get run status from flakes out often and PI records it as No Data.  When SCADA flakes out, we assume Last Good Value.  Meaning if the engine was on before the outage, we consider it on until SCADA returns and tells us otherwise.  But if we bring the run status into an analytic, it uses the value No Data and breaks everything.  Instead of No Data, we should be able to wrap that attribute in a LGV function that will report On instead of No Data.