@ibrahim.alsyed Can you please elaborate a bit on your comment? Yes, there are some basic fields available such as external ID, name, description, unit, etc. But there is also a metadata field which can contain a dictionary-like structure, which can contain any custom fields you may want.

we do not want to add fields but change what fields are defined. We need to have our own data model that specifies time series.

@Benjamin Medbøen  - please provide more information

Hi Ibrahim,

I’m the product manager now responsible for Time Series.  I’m interested to understand your requirements but it will be unlikely that we are able to change the definition of existing fields due to the dependency of other customers on those fields already.

We may be able to accomodate your requirement in other ways though.  More context is needed.  If I can understand what the field requirements are, and the intended utilisation pattern, then we can collaborate on a solution.

FYI, we are active on delivering Time Series representation as a type in Data Models (FDM) and this will be our preferred route forward for data modelling and storage solutions, as Data Models will ultimately succeed the Assets service in the medium to long term.

@ibrahim.alsyed See this post I made covering the issue: 

We will follow up this and update you accordingly. 

Just reviewing our ideas backlog and I think we can safely mark this idea as completed now that we have implemented Time Series as a Core Data Model Type.  @ibrahim.alsyed do you agree?