Two other points about the OPC Servers: 1) At last report, you had to stop the Matrikon OPC server to add a tag. You do not have to stop the AIM*OPC Server. 2) The AIM*OPC DA Server does not require AIM*Historian. Again, I offer my OPC Q&A on the I/A Series and OPC for those with an interest. Requests must be off list or I won't send it to you. It represents my opinion and the best information that I can find, but free is worth what you pay for it (if you are lucky). Regards, Alex Johnson Invensys Systems, Inc. 10707 Haddington Houston, TX 77043 713.722.2859 (office) 713.722.2700 (switchboard) 713.932.0222 (fax) ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx For the latest information on ArchestrA, go to www.invensys.com/Archestra.html. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Gabriel [mailto:CGabriel@xxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 4:38 PM To: tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [foxboro] Informix Historian vs AIM*---Matrikon OPC versus Foxboro Tom, I could not help but take note when reading this email that you did not want to go with the AIM* suite to gain access to the OPC component because of the cost. I recently purchased Matrikon's OPC server for Foxboro I/A and installed it on our system with great success. I came to find out later that Matrikon actually writes the OPC component found in AIM* for Foxboro (this is a dirty little secret that will save thousands of dollars). The installation documentation and look and feel are virtually identical to each other. The main difference is that Foxboro tweaks the software drivers so that all I/A components on the node will be automatically detected, and with Matrikon you have to manually configure the tag lists and server (this is absolutely no big deal and well worth the small inconvenience for all the money you save). We read/write point tag data between two APACS nodes and one Foxboro node. I hope this helps, Chris Gabriel Agrium US Kenai, Alaska >>> tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 03/28/03 10:41AM >>> Richard, We, like you, have been using the legacy historian since AP-20 days. We had a lot of money invested in licensing for all of them. Typically we had one per node to avoid pulling historical data across the carrierband. We wanted to be able to use this data throughout our corporation but found it too difficult to export from IA. As a result we initially developed a complex but effective way of passing OM data through INI-10's to an application built inhouse to provide process data from multiple control and lab systems to desktops throughout the corporation. We used the Foxboro legacy/informix historians only for short term historical trending on the IA system. This is still effective for tracking daily events and for tuning while on the IA system. We later adopted OSI PI as our global historical repository for data. OSI PI has worked with almost every vendor to establish interfaces that allow it to access data from most systems and their "specific" focus is Process Information. The "Process Book" desktop client interface allows users to create their own graphics, trends, and spreadsheets, and it is trasparent to the user from which system the info is coming from, (IA, LIMS, brand H, or brand R)! We first used Foxboro's AIS, now API, to pass the Fox IA data out the 2nd enet ports of AW's to PI nodes on our corporate WAN. Based on what Alex says it sounds like we could now use AIM* OPC capability to pass the data, and that might be more efficient, but we tried to broker an Advantage Upgrade from legacy to AIM* with no success and couldn't justify the significant expense just to get data out of our IA system. One has to wonder if AIM* will soon evolve into something different because of the ARCHESTRA initiative. Will this obsolete AIM* and require still another license?? From a DCS perspective, passing the data to PI and the IT realm eliminates our need to display, reduce, and archive Process INFORMATION on control systems, and lets us focus on our real objective, Process CONTROL. What we have found is that it is more economical to spend money on global solutions for capturing, displaying, and analyzing process data rather than spending money on several different vendor specific solutions, no matter how good they may be. Having said that, if you are a smaller operation and Foxboro is already your single source provider for all things Process related, AIM* sounds like it would beat the pants off of the legacy historian. If you have other process information needs outside of IA, the money spent on AIM* might be more effectively spent on a more global solution. Tom VandeWater Dow Corning Corp. Carrollton, KY -----Original Message----- From: Bakke, Richard A [mailto:rabakke@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 4:35 PM To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [foxboro] Informix Historian vs AIM* Asking for opinions concerning Informix vs AIM* Historian on 50-series: Having AP20's through 51D's, we have always been using the Informix Historian. We use it for trending (legacy Display Manager) and for reporting (via reduction groups). Since this Informix Historian is also available at ver. 7 for the AW-51F we are planning to buy, is there a really good reason to switch to the AIM* Historian? The cost to us would be learning new software and having the custom report package interface re-written. The only advantage to us that I know of would be that AIM allows changes while still running. Thanks, Rich Bakke Longview Fibre Co. _______________________________________________________________________ This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave _______________________________________________________________________ This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave _______________________________________________________________________ This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave