Clint Ramsey
My feedback
-
4 votes
-
3 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
Clint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
-
31 votesClint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
Clint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
-
140 votes
We understand and acknowledge the importance of this request. We are evaluating how to provide a homogeneous and unified experience for health information across all our connectors.
Clint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
40 votes
We have a feature in the upcoming 1.2 release of the connector that will allow you to collect data from OPC UA tags that do not have current values but do have history. We would poll these every 60 seconds (default) to find new data.
Was that part of this request in any way? Can you describe in more detail what you would like as a feature that prompted you to vote for this time?
Clint Ramsey
commented
Hey Chris, the OPC HDA interface allows back-filling by entering a custom time range, ie start and end time. The OPC UA Connector with historical access does not allow this; it starts back-filling at the last time it lost connection to the UA server, back-fills and then begins its realtime historical retrieval. The customers would like the ability to back-fill using a custom timerange, like the OPC HDA interface.
Clint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
Clint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
-
24 votes
I’m not sure why this would be needed. In the UFL connector you need to specify the name of the tag that you write to. And if that tag already exists, it will write to it. If that tag does not exist, then the connector would create that tag with your desired tag name. Why would you want the connector not to create that tag?
Clint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
32 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
21 votesClint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
-
13 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
We are looking into this feature now and may include in upcoming version.
Clint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
16 votesClint Ramsey
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesClint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
-
6 votesClint Ramsey
shared this idea
·
I have a question about this:
are we wanting data that is IN order to be tossed, for example, when we get two events in order with the same timestamp? we want the second event to be tossed?
using INSERT mode, if the data is out of order, and matches the timestamp of an existing event, it should get tossed with a -109 showing in the PI DA log