Skip to Content

Do you love PI?

Have you ever thought about easing your tasks by improving PI feature or functionality? Do you have any observation or suggestion you would like to share which could help your fellow PI developers/administrators with their day to day job? Have you ever thought about some specific capability of the current PI systems which needs to be improved?

 

If you have “Yes” for any of the above questions, then I think it’s time when we collect all these observations, ideas and suggestions. I have created a wiki “Improving PI Features – Functionalities – Behavior” with a few points which I thought needs to be improved or which has to be taken care of by a PI developer/administrator. These are some basic observations and I know there would be lot more that these. Therefore I need your help to add all interesting observations, ideas and suggestions. If we get some strong opinion about certain points, I hope we could reach out to SAP in some way.

 

If you have suggestions, please edit the wiki page yourself or put a comment on this blog and I will add the content in wiki. Before adding any point, please make note of these points:

  • The format in which you should add your observation is  

         Heading
         PI System: XI x.x SP xx, PI 7.x EhPx SP xx
         Observation: …
         Improvement: …

  • I have divided the wiki into 5 components ESR (or IR), Integration Directory, Runtime, Monitoring, Others. Please add your content into appropriate section.

 

An example:

SWC Change History

PI System: PI 7.1 EhP1

Observation: When “Objects are original” and “Objects are modifiable” checkboxes are changed for any Software Component (SWC) in ESR (for any landscape), you can simply save it and there is no change list created. Also, no history is maintained in the “History” option of menu.

Improvement: SWCs are critical for ESR and there must be some way to check history of changes made on it.

 

It may happen that some of our observations turn up to be incorrect. But why not discuss it, that’s why we are here.

 

I can’t promise if these would be corrected in upcoming versions, but you never know! 😉 It would be anytime good to have them collected at one location and accessible to everyone.

To report this post you need to login first.

9 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Yash Agarwal
    Transport Mechanism in PI to include ESR and ID objects needs changes. They should probably follow what they have in ABAP where any new object creation / change in existing objects needs a transport request at the beginning. This way you make sure none of your objects are missed. So even if you do some development for test purposes, we can have a dummy TR for that.

    In current scenario we can build as many objects as we want and then create TRs and attach objects to it. It is prone to human mistakes and we tend t miss objects in the transport which is only found while testing in the new environment.

    (0) 
  2. Amol Joshi
    my observation after working on a project dedicated for monitoring was that the features in alerts like “Supress Multiple Alerts of the Rule” and subsequently the housekeeping jobs like “RSXMB_RESTART_MESSAGES” have a room for improvement.

    If i want that on every error, i need to recieve an alert, i need that i keep the checkbox not selected. But then the restart jobs, if configured with default retries of 20 (or even reduced to optimal i.e. 3),  end up creating many more alerts for the same error / same message ID.

    (0) 

Leave a Reply