Vault IdeaStation
Share your wish list directly with the Autodesk Vault Development Team
New Idea
30 Kudos
RobertStein

Web Based ADMS

Status: Accepted
by Employee on ‎07-13-2012 04:03 PM
It would be great to have a web based ADMS console. This would help companies where ITdoesnt let anyone have remote access to servers.
Status: Accepted
16 Kudos

Allow an administrator to define a UDP that is updated on lifecycle transition.

 

When a document moves from

WIP to In Review write the username to a UDP e.g.  Drafted by

In Review to Released write the username to a UDP e.g.  Approved by

 

Currently it is manual effort to update the UDP prior to state change.

 

This is an Out of the Box feature with Solidworks Enterprise PDM and requested by users moving from this system to Vault

Status: Under Review
13 Kudos
MiWaNiZa

Vault licensing flexibility

Status: Future Consideration
by *Expert Elite* | International Moderator on ‎01-17-2013 12:09 AM

Please, add an ability to use several Vault license types at one server. For example, using combination of Vault Collaboration and Vault Professional.

Because not all users need the top functionality, but read-only from web-client is not enough for them - so why pay more? Customers really need this feature.

 

One of discussions: at Vault forum.

9 Kudos

Allow Vault installation/configuration to connect to an Instance not named AUTODESKVAULT

We have several separate vault servers (Professional) all connected to remate databases on an SQL cluster. The SQL people claim that they can only have one single instance called AUTODESKVAULT in their complete environment AND that instance names MUST follow their naming conventions

Actually, vault is the only software that I know of that requires a specific instance name

Regards

Patrick

8 Kudos
Richard.Rankin

Licence Usage

Status: Future Consideration
by Product Support on ‎06-26-2012 06:16 AM

Licence usage is tracked in the vlog, but its really tricky to analyse and trace who is currently using a Vault licence and how many licences are being consumed, until a user is denied a licence.

 

Useful information would be licence usage tracking throughout the day, so we can see peak times and trends and if more licences need to be installed.

 

Also

Who is consuming a licence.

How many licences are being consumed by 1 user

How many licences are being consumed by client machine.

7 Kudos
m_simons

ACADE block library

Status: Under Review
by Valued Contributor m_simons on ‎08-20-2012 04:38 AM

It would be nice to see native support for the ACADE block library in Vault similar to the way it already handles content center.

 

I was able to sort-of finagle vault to work with an ACADE block library but it was not ideal.

 

Status: Under Review
6 Kudos
Richard.Rankin

Backup Databases Only

Status: Future Consideration
by Product Support on ‎06-26-2012 06:20 AM

It would be useful to be able to backup\restore with out the filestore.

 

A commandline swithc would be useful to exclude the filestore from the backup if you just want to either validate your databases by restoring them to a test\dummy machine.

 

For sending the backup to support

 

For testing the migration to a new release

 

Then the ability to attach the filestore later.

5 Kudos

Hello,

i think it's useful to have a scripting-interface like vlogic (http://justonesandzeros.typepad.com/blog/2012/03/vlogic-2013.html).

It should be possible to make extensions with this scripting interface for the job server, too.

Best regards

Michael

5 Kudos

the goal is to run the job processor on many files that are spread accross several replicated servers.

 

the hurdle is that if you have the job processor logged into one server and it attempts to process a file that is currently owned by a different server, the task cannot be completed successfully. "error"...

 

we need to be able to allow for this in the job processor settings, whether it is to simply choose

1.  "skip file that is not owned by your server", or

2. "run jobs on tasks with preference to one server over another". the job processor would be able to batch together a few hundred jobs for example, to complete on the local replicated server, then reboot itself (or log out and log into a different server) to run a few hundred files that are owned by the other server(s).

3. allow the job processor to run on files regardless of whether they are owned by another server, or

4. allow the option to choose: "if files are owned by a different server, then just run (several topions may be available here).

 

 

there may be easier ways to manage this but the job processor is going to be of much more use with some enhancement. (to be read in consideration with the several other requests for job processor improvements currently on the ideas station and discussion forumns).

Status: Accepted
4 Kudos
Andrew1307

Improved Vault Users & Groups Managment

Status: Accepted
by Andrew1307 on ‎05-20-2014 09:38 AM

As it currently stands it is not possible to delete users and groups within Autodesk Vault. 

 

This is a problem. I understand Autodesk's stance on that the users need to be retained for historical reasons, however the management side of things needs to be improved. 

 

For example I created a group and users that were never used. Why can't I delete them? Objects that were never used should be allowed to be deleted. Also as the database grows and users are hired and terminated, the list will grow to an unmanageable mess.

 

What has happened to me is that I am in the middle of implementing Vault for my company. When I first set it up I created users. However, since then we have switched to a Domain and have now imported the Domain users and groups to use. Now I have groups and users that have never been used that I have no way of deleting or using for anything else. 

 

I have found blogs and forum posts suggesting that users be diabled and renamed so that they are sorted appropriately. This is a hack solution at best and not a real solution to the problem. 

 

As I see it two things need to happen:

 

1. Unused users and groups need to be allowed to be deleted. 

2. There needs to be additional options and sorting methods for used users and groups that are no longer active. ie. Once they are disabled they are moved to a different list and only retained for historical purposes. 

Status: Accepted
Can you provide some examples of other software applications that you would consider having a really good user management interface?
Submit Your Ideas

Share and shape product ideas.

New Idea
You are not logged in.

Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register

Labels
Top Kudoed Authors