Matt Voll

My feedback

  1. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  PI Vision » Analytics / Calculations  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll shared this idea  · 
  2. 90 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    17 comments  ·  PI DataLink » Installation & Upgrading  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    i understand the difficulty of building a datalink add-in from scratch for Office Online, but considering the direction of online/cloud style computing and organization's push toward Office online and this being a 4yr old 'idea' and the 3rd highest vote in the PI Datalink section . . . the lack of any update or movement is incredibly worrying.

    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  3. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  PI Server » Asset Framework (AF)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  4. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  PI Vision » Sharing & Collaboration  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  5. 163 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  PI Vision » User Experience  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  6. 7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  PI Server » Asset Framework (AF)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    i'm not sure i agree with the idea of modifying the pipoint data reference config window . . . but, yes, the inability to do a summarization analysis with a filter expression in a single analysis is a HUGE issue. This type of analysis/calculation is very common in excel/datalink, and while I don't think everything in Excel can be easily done in AF, it is a glaring gap. Especially when training/showing new users the "power" in AF and, to them, it seems like a lot of extra steps to do filtering when they are used to it in a single datalink function.

    i'd much rather just see it as an optional arguement field in the existing summarization functions (tagtot, tagmean, tagavg, etc etc)

    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  7. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    7 comments  ·  PI Server » Data Archive  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    probably more accurate to say obfuscate the bit wise representation with the corresponding state name . . . but yes, we are in agreement

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    i'm not certain anything needs to change on the client side per-say. The clients are just seeing a State number assignment on a trend with the value being the state name. clients would still just be intepretting a number assignment (bit number) on a trend with the value being the state name.

    Its almost like there needs to be Digital State Set Type that can be chosen (and this is just an example/idea). The type we are used to now is where the State Numbers are integer representations and go up to 16384 states. An additional type would be where State Numbers are bit representations

    The server side could still present the clients with state numbers, with the server handling whether the state number is from an integer representation or bit representation

    example bit mask/flag attached. this example CAN be done with a normal digital set, bit it requires 1016 empty states, but its only a couple of bits away from exceeding the limit

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    @Kenneth, in a bit flagging methodology the interger representation will be something like 0=None, 1=Run, 2=RunFwd, 4=RunRev, 8=Starting, 16=Stopping, 32=No Power, 64=Error, 128=Interlocked. This set of values is going to be different for different devices . . . uses are not going to be able to tell/remember what 8 means . . . it needs to be in a digital set.

    The digital set will unfortunately contain 128 items in it even though only 9 values are being used.

    We have numerous examples where a 16 bit method is being used (my above comment about being limited to 14 bits) . . . 16 bit example would be something like

    -one Status out of 27 possibles ​Integer=655560 ​Bit Flags- 1010 0000 0000 1100 1000

    Again a user is not going to really know/remember what 655560 means compared to the other 26 options

    Matt Voll shared this idea  · 
  8. 10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  PI Server » Data Archive  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    you give people the power to make analyses in AF along with the capability of backfilling . . . of course they are going to be in there backfilling years worth of data every time they make a new analysis. Anytime anyone asks for a new piece of data (calculation or not) . . . they will always want the history of that data point . . . so on AF analyses that requires backfilling.

    . . . and next day/week/month they will realize some additional item to put in their analysis and make the edit and backfill for all those years all over again again

    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  9. 6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  PI Server » Analytics & Calculations  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    yes, using the ID as a default for the system makes sense. this enhancement request is less about changing that default behavior and more about having the ability to set a system's default behavior to something else, server side . . . instead of having to change it on individual user's computers.

    also, even if a case was made that the ID would need to ALWAYS default into the tag name . . . i'd still make the argument that being able to add other tag properties (ptsecurity, step, descriptor, exdesc) is a huge need

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    utilizing AF analyses (which inherently leads to the need to have the Analysis Service create pi tags) does not mean that an AF User fully understands all the pi tag properties and does not mean that person is capable or permissible to modify normal process tags on interfaces. The typical AF user also may not fully understand the extensive usage of parameter substitution parameters, nor the need to keep some organization and structure necessary for us to to manage, find, and troubleshoot these tags when there are problems.

    having a defined exdesc=AFPAth... like in my above example is critical for us to be able to find where tags are being populated from later. This allows the tag name itself to deviate from the typical naming above while still allowing us to find the analysis.

    just because someone is given permissions to create analyses and thus pipoints does NOT mean we are making them piadmins where they have potential control over LOTS of process tags. But they should be able to maintain some permission on the tags they have created so that they can make changes to them . . . like switching step=1 to step=0 or vice versa. Thus making sure they are have the appropriate ptsecurity to allow them to edit the tag

    also access to the management tab in PSE is not the problem . . . regardless of whether they have that component installed . . . the above issues can only be addressed by modifying every individual's PSE installation . . . instead of having everyone's PSE settings at least default to some server side configuration. Its unmanageable to have to make this change on every users computer.

    one last example . . . at this was done by a 'piadmin' . . . because even many piadmins find it easier to create tags in SMT than use PSE to create the tags because PSE, by default, puts that ridiculous ID string of characters on the tag name and they don't realize the setting in PSE exists to modify that default behavior. The piadmin created a tag with the identical naming structure as one of our ControlLogix tags and had an AF Analysis output to it. Causing lots of confusion as why an apparent ControlLogix tag had no pointsource and no instrumenttagand, and difficulty for us to find where the analysis was.

    Matt Voll shared this idea  · 
  10. 20 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  PI DataLink » Functions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hi Everyone,

    Thank you for your feedback! Acknowledging the value that dynamic arrays will deliver, we plan to support the feature in PI DataLink 2021.

    Please stay tuned for more updates, and don’t stop giving us feedback.

    Thanks,
    Victor Zhang
    OSIsoft, Product Manager

    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  11. 8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  NOC Services » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  12. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  PI DataLink » Functions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    For us lab data is common numerical data point that we use Step=ON for. A process sample analyzed by a lab represents a single moment in time, when the sample was taken, and due to the infrequent nature of the sample (ranging from once per hour to once a day), it would not be accurate to represent this data, visually, using linear interpolation. The process could be following any variety of behavior between the data points; roller coaster ups and downs, steady average with occasional dips, erratic with occasional spikes, etc, etc. So lacking this context the most reasonable assumption is to have step=on and have the data merely represent the state in which the process was last analyzed. Higher frequency process data, like from instruments, is sampled/scanned/advise at a higher frequency, that is reasonable to assume a linear interpolation trend between data points since they are likely less than a minute apart (ignoring any compression factors in that statement).

    This step behavior also helps user realize that lab data should be event-weighted summarizations and not time-weighted. a once per shift lab sample is meant to represent 8 hours of time, if the process is down or a shift sample is missed, using time-weighted summarization results in the last sample before the gap to be over represented compared to other data point

    That explains why lab data would be Step=ON as a default. . . now when we get to subsequent data analysis . . . well different users want to treat the data differently based on their own judgement, and possibly make different assumptions . . . even lacking the context mentioned above. Taking a big data set for a modeling effort results in numerous decisions and assumptions in an effort to clean, filter, align data . . . I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be able to actively make the decision to use linear interpolation on a step=on tag if they so choose and makes sense for their analysis

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    yes, so that a user can force the tag's interpolation to behave as if it was Step=off, instead of is true behavior of step=on

    Matt Voll shared this idea  · 
  13. 312 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    24 comments  ·  PI Vision » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    I'm tired of the printer marketing spam on this thread . . . rescinding my vote . . .

  14. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  PI Server » Analytics & Calculations  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  15. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  PI DataLink » Functions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  16. 71 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    12 comments  ·  PI Server » Asset Framework (AF)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Matt Voll commented  · 

    I can change an attribute from a PIPoint reference to <None> and it will still show the green template box. Visually it looks like the attribute is still following the template when it is not exactly. You don't know whether it is or not without checking the template or by resetting it to template.

    Sometimes the tag names are structured to allow for parameter substitution in the data reference but sometimes that doesn't work out and the template's data reference will just be "Enter Tag Name". So i get the point of the data reference being changed with it still adhering to the intent of the template.

    However even in scenarios where parameter substitutions are used. I've had plenty of occurrences where i have had to change the data reference (for example from ..%Attribute%.UFL... to ..%Attribute%-UFL...) but this change was not carried through the attributes where the template is applied and those attributes still show like they are part of the template. The difference is only noticed on careful inspection or by hitting 'reset to template'

    It seems like there should be a middle ground. Green box for an attribute following the template EXACTLY. No box for attribute that exist outside the template. And then something like an orange box for an attribute that is part of the template but has had some small things changed about (different data reference for example)

    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  17. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  NOC Services » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll shared this idea  · 
  18. 11 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  NOC Services  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  19. 20 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  NOC Services  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
  20. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  NOC Services » General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Matt Voll supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1 3 4

Feedback and Knowledge Base

Posted ideas will have one of the following statuses.
Full definition of these statuses can be found on the Home Page.
No status
TELL US MORE
EVALUATING
PLANNED
IN DEVELOPMENT
COMPLETED
DECLINED