Stop telling me I need to save something I haven't changed

[andrewiv]

Inventor shouldn't be prompting for a save on a file that hasen't changed.  I'll give an example.  I insert assembly1 into assembly2 and set it to positional rep1.  I save assembly2 and close it.  Now I re-open assembly2 and it asks me if I want to update.  I say yes and now it asks if I want to check out assembly1.  I say no since I haven't done anything to it.  Now Inventor tells me that I need to save assembly1 and assembly2 even though I just saved them and the only thing I have done is open them.  I think this is wrong and it can create a ton of unneeded versions of the assembly when using vault.

[ihayesjr]

@Bert_Bimmel Have you reproduced any of these with the 2021 release?

[Bert_Bimmel]

@ihayesjr 

For the first issue: Yup! The library with outdated massprops getting dirtied upon initial save of a referencing assembly has been explicitly tried by me using Release 25 (aka 2021).

For the second issue: Nope! (As I have just told. That's why I asked since which release this is supposed to behave as you stated. I just don't believe that this issue has been solved meanwhile)

Shutting down now -> different timezone. c u tomorrow.

Greetings, Bert

[mateusz]

In my opinion problem is not in Vault or any other PDM but in Inventor itself.

I work as a Plant design engineer, we have large assemblies and this issue is very significant for us. If many people work at the same project there is no way to avoid dirtying files (everyone has slight different part building approach). 

However, the solution is very simple: change approach inside the software and make all parts/assemblies static, stop updating them, do not read relationships between parts, do not update geometry automatically. Inventor should not updates entire assembly if I place (or edit) a part in sub-sub-sub-assembly. The same if you open an assembly or drawing, let it open as it was saved, no automatic action.

This behavior is the real large assembly performance killer. Often, I have to wait 5-15 minutes for updating in moments, in which I completely do not need to have refreshed main assembly. That updating is absolutely necessary? If parts would appear in slightly wrong location, or the geometry is a bit wrong is okay! I can click rebuild and that's all. But, please, let me control it. Or, check if the part has read-only status then do not update geometry, do not read relationships and so on. Why? Because someone already did that before sending to Vault. The number of dirty files would way more smaller. Defer updates does not help.

[Bert_Bimmel]

@mateusz 

Apparently we have two completely opposing opinions about that: I always pray that it's mandatory, that Inventor/Vault must make sure, the database is consistent without any pending updates before checking in sth to the vault, so that the next one to download and open it is not prompted to perform some postponed updates in a more or less randomly chosen moment.

I have only a very rough imagination of how the constraint-solver works, as every geometrical constraint might affect another, so I assume it builds up a large system of equations and then solves it - thus, placing a new constraint without reconsidering all others seems quite challenging - if not impossible -  to me.

The real pita is the compromise that autodesk has implemented - something between yours and my opinion: Performing some updates when they're due the first time, and some later, without notice to the user which updates are still pending and why.

For your problem, my first recommendation would be: Don't use the file-opening-dialogue from the vault-add-in, but the classic Inventor-Dialogue, and then check your vault browser for red cracknels. This way, you can control, which files that your colleagues have worked on meanwhile are updated in your local workspace and when. Just download/update them from the vault, when they're claimed "done".

Cheers Bert.

[mateusz]

@Bert_Bimmel 

I totaly agree with that - the data must be consistent before sending to Vault. However, I think Inventor should examine only the files which at I am working on, not the entire assembly (which is mostly locked, not checked-out). Now, we have situation that each PC which is involved to the project updating constantly the same not-edited files. 

That is also related to constrains, for example: if you work in sub-assembly, then other assemblies (in mechanical point of view) are solid bodies. There is no reason to check what is inside, relationships between parts, etc. We could update everything by a button. Again, Inventor should reconsider constrains and geometry only at level that you are currently working.

Yes, we exactly do this workaround 🙂 but if someone edit part in very deep level of assembly tree a rebuild of entire plant is beeing conducted, thus we obtain a lot of dirty files. I am not really interested why they are dirty, just stop updating them. I think files always will be more or less dirty. The software should be flexibly and not force do create model in only one path/approach to avoid making it dirty.

The automatic updates takes a lot of minutes, even hours from week perspective. I almost begging to disable that.
There is even similar IDEA in the forum: LINK

Best regards,
Mateusz

[n.schotten]

Depending on how an assembly tree is constrained, a change at a distant sub
level can still impact on how things get positioned. Thus needing a total
scan of affected constraints.

However, positional changes etc shouldn't cause individual part files to get
dirtied. Only the (sub) assemblies might, in order to reflect/register the
changed position (constraint) data.

[h.schkorwaga]

Maybe this Problems become obsolete if Autodesk could consider this --> https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/write-protection-for-write-protected-files/idi-p/56023...

[mateusz]

@n.schotten 

I agree with you, but the scan should performed on demand. Just indicator, message box is enough. 

Also, automatic updating derived parts are not necessary. 

[mateusz]

This not-wanted background geometry update happens everywhere. Even I only modify a layer style in a drawing file:

I hold my opinion that this is the performance killer. Not slow data loading or slow drawing view creation. This is the issue which supposed to be fixed.

Column with information what have been modified is not the solution. 

[Gabriel_Watson]

^ completely agree with the above. This is the #1 monster issue with Autodesk PDM. Period.

Probably the biggest loss of money/time in using Vault with Inventor. We're talking probably billions worldwide.

[Bert_Bimmel]

I have just discovered a nice new one (introduced somewhen between release 2016 and 2020):

Create a sheet metal part, and set the material to "as sheet metal rule". save it, close it and reopen it. then tell the part via API "consist of the material, you're allready consisting of" ( i.e.  ThisApplication.ActiveDocument.ComponentDefinition.Material = ThisApplication.ActiveDocument.Materials.Item(ThisApplication.ActiveDocument.ComponentDefinition.Material.Name)), and BAM!, you've won a geometric update of your part (which, as we all know, corrupt's everything else).

You might object, that this API call doesn't make much sense, but there are PDM systems out there, that claim to maintain the Material properties aside from Inventor, and in that case, it may happen. (it does also happen if you actually change the material via API, but in this case, you have to update all related component's massproperties anyway).

How is that behaviour supposed to make any sense? Well, I can answer that question myself: "not at all!"

Which leads me to my next question: How is it possible to implement something like that accidentially? You must raise a flag, when setting the Material to "as sheet metal rule", save it to the file, and query it again, when the API calls, in order to decide whether to  raise the "geometric update pending" - flag or not.

That's grist to my mill, that the Inventor developers have no interest in maintaining a clean set of data that can be managed reasonably by any PDM-system!

Dear developers, if you're trying to isolate that problem, have a glance at the MBxUserSettingsAttribute-Record inside the PmDCSegment, two Bytes prior to the pointer to the MBxUnfoldStyleState-Record!

[bradeneuropeArthur]

Thank you @Bert_Bimmel for your deep investigation in this!

I appreciate it.

I and many others hope that there will be a solution for this major PDM/Inventor problem soon!

Regards,

[bradeneuropeArthur]

Hi all,

@andrewiv 

@Bert_Bimmel 
@Gabriel_Watson 

@mateusz 

@h.schkorwaga 

May I ask the users how they are dealing with these dirty marks today.

Did they find a solution for it or workaround.

Thanks and regards,

[Bert_Bimmel]

Haha, not at all any more! We've replaced vault by another pdm-system, hat rather discards your intended changes without notice than bugging you with incomprehensible save prompts!

[bradeneuropeArthur]

Hi @Bert_Bimmel 

Does this work better then?

[Bert_Bimmel]

wrong link!

[Bert_Bimmel]

@Anonymous  If you appreciate your work beeing flushed down the toilet, then yes!

[jeremy.larre]

Frustrating
but now tell yourself that you will not loose time to update again and again, multiplying versions, cleaning files, searching the reason why it need an update....and so on

[Bert_Bimmel]

@jeremy.larre  Maybe that's a question of individual preferences, but that annoys me less, than redoing my original work, because it hasn't been saved properly.

[bradeneuropeArthur]

At the moment redoing my work is also an issue within vault and inventor. Because if it is still not possible to work with mixed versions/revisions you will sometimes pull your design back to a few weeks ago. So what is the difference?

But I agree that has to do with preferences