7 Replies Latest reply on Apr 2, 2015 3:56 PM by gregor

    AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run

    AlistairFrith

      I don't know what the best place to ask this would be but we have an issue with a number of Abacus analyses... If we click 'Evaluate', they work fine and return valid results. But if we try to actually run them, they say 'Failed to resolve required input <input path>' on more than 1/2 the input attributes.

       

      Has anyone else seen this?

       

      Alistair


        • Re: AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run
          Rhys Kirk

          Only seen something similar when running the x86 version of PSE, it would evaluate fine but fail to run in the x64 analysis process.

          If you evaluate in the x64 version of PSE does it evaluate okay?

          • Re: AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run
            dng

            Hi Alistair,

             

            Are they expression or rollup analyses? Can you give an example of the input path/analysis configuration which fails? What version of AF, AF Client and PI Analysis Service are you running?

            Are you referencing attributes in parents elements? If so, can you try to use this syntax?

                 '..|..|attribute|child_attribute'

            • Re: AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run
              skwan

              "Evaluate" is done by the client (PSE) but when the analyses run, they are run by PI Analysis Service.  If I were to take a stab at this, I would check to make sure PI Analysis Service has the proper read permission to your inputs.

               

              --

              Steve Kwan

              AF Product Manager

              • Re: AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run
                AlistairFrith

                This was in the 64-bit version of PSE.

                 

                OSI Support representative did a remote session, Tried various things, could not find a root cause but bought everything back to life by restarting the Analysis service.

                 

                The problem was obviously with the analysis service and Steves comment about 'evaluate' being run by PSE explain why that was not affected. This is a development system with PI, SQL Server, AF, Analysis Service and PSE all running on the same VM  so I would not have thought it would be an issue with the KST. It was only a small number of analyses that were broken. I would have thought that accounts and permissions would affect all analyses since we have no special security set up, all assetsand tags are the same. Also I am sure some of the affected analyses were working originally and only 'broke' after a time (though I may be mis-remembering). I will check these things when I am back on the system though.

                 

                --- Alistair.

                  • Re: AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run
                    André Åsheim

                    Analysis service account needs access to:

                    • Elements
                      • Read/Write data
                    • Analysis
                    • PI tag (since you have everything on same machine the !Proxy_127! trust should give the service PIAdmin rights on the PI Data Archive)
                      • Read source tag data
                      • Write on output tag data

                     

                     

                    This is how I've configured security for the analysis service account (on a strict security envirnoment)

                    R=Read, RD=Read Data, W= Write, WD= Write Data, S=Subscribe, SO=Subscribe others, E=Execute

                    Top level (right click database-->)

                    Analysis: R,RD,W,WD,S,SO,E

                    Elements:R,RD,W,WD,S,SO,E

                    Notifications: R,RD,S,SO,E

                     

                    Element Structure (all elements): R,RD,W,WD,S,SO,E

                    • Re: AF Analyses 'Evaluate' fine but fail to run
                      gregor

                      Hello Alistair,

                       

                      Looking at above discussion I wouldn't know how to identify the "correct answer" but your update from January 30th would probably be a good choice. For now, please allow me marking your question as assumed answered. If you have additional questions / concerns, please feel free to continue the discussion at any time.