Product Ideas

The “Scheduled” feature, currently in beta, has proven to be user-friendly and well-received.I believe this feature is currently available only to users with both “Checklist admin” and “Template admin” roles, but would it be possible to make it available exclusively to “Checklist admins”?In our company, we assign permissions based on the following roles, and it is often the people who actually perform the inspections (i.e., “Checklist admins”) who issue checklists from the “Scheduled” tab.Therefore, making this feature available to “Checklist admins” as well would make it even easier to use.Template admin → People who edit templates. Only a few people.Checklist admin → People who actually perform inspections. All InField users.This may differ from the original design intent of this feature, but I would appreciate it if you could consider this as one suggestion.

Currently, when attempting to schedule certain functions—such as moving averages—the results may differ from the normal calculation results verified before the scheduled execution.Additionally, the results of scheduled executions vary depending on the execution cycle.A sample is shown in the screenshot.Although I haven’t been able to verify everything, I suspect that similar issues may occur with other functions that set the window size.Users typically assume that scheduled calculations are performing correctly without being aware of these discrepancies, and as things stand now, there is a risk that they may rely on incorrect results. Therefore, I expect that the correct calculation results will be recorded regardless of the schedule settings.

Currently, monitoring alert emails cannot be customized beyond a certain point: the email subject is always “An alert was created” and the body of the email cannot be customized to be more user-friendly for readers, etc. I would like more customization for the alert emails.

In Charts, you currently have to set up monitoring jobs on an individual basis.  I’d like the ability to set up a single monitoring job and have it available to apply to multiple charts.

This feature request is to add the ability for Charts to send notification alerts via mobile texts. Often times, manufacturing leadership would like to be alerted off-hours for major operational issues. Text messages have proven to be an excellent means of alerting key resources outside of normal working hours.

Today there is limited to no API access to Charts, creating several issues.One obvious issue is that we cannot automate the setup of Charts. Eg, when an anomaly detection method detects an issue, we would like to be able to auto-create the Charts with the necessary timeseries, timerange, calculations and overlay anomaly insight (CogniteActivity extension). This is not possible today (only pre-build url with instances and range).But another issue is around the maintainability of Charts. Due to the limit on the number or Views/revisions, we need to deprecate and delete old revisions on a regular basis (in particular in periods with heavy data model development). As far as I have seen, Atlas, Canvas and Chart lock the View version to the latest version (or maybe based on the location filter) during config. For Atlas agents and Canvas’ we can find the View versions via the API, allowing us to identify users depending on models that are deprecated, and also auto-duplicate with the updated v

When creating calculations in CHARTS it would be VERY useful to have logic functions (AND, OR, NOT, XOR) which allow multiple (>6 for AND and OR) boolean inputs (TRUE/FALSE) and a single output.This would be really useful for tracking events which may be dependent on multiple conditions being active (or not active). 

Recently, the use of Charts has been increasing, and more users are creating complex calculations for data visualization.In this context, we have received feedback requesting a “Back” button (undo function).When users are building complex calculation formulas, there have been multiple instances where the calculation source suddenly disappears, forcing them to restart from scratch. The more complex the calculation, the greater the impact of this issue.To mitigate this, it would be extremely helpful to have a function that allows users to go back one step (e.g., an undo or back button).We believe this feature would significantly improve usability and reduce the risk of losing work during calculation editing. Thank you for your consideration.

This might already be reported, but I was not able to find it when I searched.Currently Chart only uses an internal, and very limited, unit conversion. It would be a big step forward if we could also use the native unit conversion in timeseries, which is much richer than what is offered via Charts.Since you might have timeseries with no CogniteUnit, Charts still needs to support unit conversion defined in the UI, as a backup solution 

When calculating daily totals or averages using the Resample function, the calculation seems to be performed based on the 00:00 – 24:00 UTC timeframe. I would like the system to account for time zone differences so that the totals or averages are calculated based on the 00:00 – 24:00 period in Japan Standard Time (UTC+9).

 Do we have a feature in the roadmap to allow for showing annotation to annotation lines (manually added in blue) vs. today just having annotations to file? (I realize there are some DM limitations) See below.  The doc to doc annotations (data) and visualization (screenshots) are currently going from a bounding box around the text in the arrow (source doc) to the document (target doc). The line target destination is the center of the document.We have the reverse connection from the bounding box to the center of the doc.What we need is a connection between the bounding box around the text in one document to the corresponding bounding box in the other document.Example: on the left attachment,The left document L12... 74A-1296 annotation goes to the document 1296 on the right. But it attaches to the center of the doc.And R11 ... -74A-1295 on the right connect to the document 1295, connects to the center of the doc.These 2 connections are in orange.The requirement is to have only one connec

I would like to suggest upgrading the Large Language Model (LLM) used by Canvas AI.Currently, the model appears to struggle with understanding technical documents and often provides incomplete or inaccurate answers to relatively straightforward questions. It also has limited ability to interpret visual content such as graphs, charts, and engineering plots, which are common in technical documentation.An improved LLM with stronger reasoning and multimodal capabilities would significantly enhance the user experience by enabling it to:Provide more accurate and context-aware answers. Better understand engineering and technical terminology. Interpret graphs, charts, tables, and other visual elements within documents. Generate more comprehensive and reliable document summaries. Handle complex documents while maintaining context across multiple pages.These improvements would make Canvas AI much more valuable for users working with engineering reports, operational documents, and technical studi

 As a CDF Platform Administrator,I want the ability to configure the PI Extractor to include ptsecurity and datasecurity attributes in the extracted metadata,So that I can use these source-level access control lists (ACLs) to automate and enforce data access security for groups of users in Cognite Data Fusion.  Configuration OptionsGIVEN a standard PI Extractor installation,WHEN looking at the extractor configuration file (e.g., config.yml),THEN there must be a new, optional configuration parameter (e.g., include-internal-security-metadata: true/false or an override setting).GIVEN the configuration parameter is omitted or set to false,WHEN the extractor runs,THEN it must continue to exclude ptsecurity and datasecurity metadata as it currently does (default secure behavior). Extraction BehaviorGIVEN the configuration parameter is set to true,WHEN the extractor performs discovery and extracts Time Series metadata from PI,THEN the ptsecurity and datasecurity attributes must be successfull

 The comment feature in Canvas is really great and we are planning to use it for our shift handovers. We plan to add multiple comments but having to click the comment icon every time to read the content is quite tedious. Since we want the comments to be immediately visible as soon as we open Canvas, we would love to have a feature, like ”pin” comment content.  

Today Canvas cannot show the information stored in a JSONObject. This is unfortunate since method specific information for more general output objects will be stored in the JSONObject to avoid overcrowding the output object. One example is anomaly detection. There will be a large number of different analytics methods detecting anomalies,, each with its own method specific information not relevant for other analysis, but all writing to a common Anomaly View.  As long as the analysis specific information  will not be used for search and filtering, it will be stored on the JSONObject

I have Canvas’ with View revisions that has been deleted. If I delete the “object” directly in the Canvas, it works well. However, if I delete the Canvas directly without first deleting the objects, I get stranded nodes (FdmInstanceContainerReference nodes). If I delete a Canvas with object linking to existing View revisions, it works well.Would be nice if this was fixed since getting Canvas’ with outdated revisions is relatively common in a period with heavy data model development (revisions are constantly bumping, and we need to clean old revisions to stay below the view/revision limit). Now we are forces to run cleanup scripts on stranded canvas nodes on a regular basis

The proposal is to get in the Search overview, the location of the contextualized tag in the 3D CAD structure. Such feature will help the user from where the 3D CAD contextualization is coming from in teh 3D CAD structure.Rigth now we do not have this feature, and this should allow us to potentially correct, add, remove some pieces of the 3D CAD structure contextualizationSee the attached illustration... 

The layers on a PDF are not currently clickable within CDF. I have an example of a file that was loaded as a PDF with certain layers turned off.  When we put this PDF in a canvas and then downloaded the canvas, all the layers were turned on, making it difficult to read. It appears Cognite turned on all internal PDF layers when creating the download.Ask: A - Let’s leave the layer state as is when downloading from a CanvasB - Don't embed the layers and leave them exposed in the resulting PDFC - Have layers viewable in Search PreviewD - (Future) Expose the internal layers in Canvas/preview 

Problem Statement: Currently, there is no great way to print comments in industrial canvas (If there is not aware of a good way).  Potential Solution Option(s):Anchored to DocumentComment Selection box in the download list (similar to multiple pages) that would allow comments to be turned on that would be anchored to the document based where the user placed it. Comment Pane on right side that shows comments for that page. (Similar to microsoft suite review pane)Separate Comment PageComment Page independent similar to the cover page that could be checked or un-checked that would display on a separate page that would be part of the download.  Downside is the comments may not make sense if there are not associated with the drawing.

Example: The filter shows options in English, while in the list view they are displayed in Norwegian. For example, the filter shows “Ready”, whereas in the view it shows “Klar”.

Documents that are most important for the technician should be listed first, e.g. P&IDs (XB). 

When dropping a file from your desktop/drives into Canvas, the file size increases. As one example, it went up 30 times; from 84kb --> 2520kb (without the canvas coverpage). The file size change makes it difficult to download the canvas, as it gets stuck. The end users cannot download the canvas they create and therefore are prone to stop using the platform. 

Hi Team,It was observed that List and Search queries have some functional limitations which are handled explicitly by teams. Below are the expectations: Search queries must support pagination, enabling users to retrieve results beyond the current 1000-record limit. Pagination should include a cursor or offset mechanism, allowing seamless navigation through large datasets without data loss or duplication. List queries must support case-insensitive filtering Users need substring search over large datasets, which is not fully supported. Can we provide feature like "Contains" which will allow substring search.Thanks,Rahul

 Cognite Data Fusion (CDF) appears to enforce a limit of approximately 200 Azure AD group memberships when resolving permissions for Service Principals. This limitation does not exist in Microsoft Graph, which supports retrieval of all group memberships associated with a user or Service Principal.As organizations scale their authorization models using Azure AD groups, this restriction can prevent access inheritance from functioning as expected and requires manual workarounds that increase operational overhead and governance complexity.Business ContextMany enterprise deployments use Azure AD groups to manage access to assets, plants, data products, and other resources within CDF.A common architecture relies on: Azure AD groups representing access domains. Group Object IDs mapped to corresponding Source IDs in CDF. Service Principals inheriting permissions through group membership. However, when the number of group memberships exceeds the current supported threshold, some memberships

SummaryWhen building workflows in Cognite Data Fusion to populate views in Data Models, there is often a need for intermediate, curated datasets between raw source data and the final target data model.Today, this intermediate data can be stored in RAW tables, but that requires customers to manage temporary tables, cleanup logic, naming conventions, and lifecycle handling manually. A native, workflow-managed temporary storage layer would make workflow development cleaner, reduce repetitive transformation logic, and simplify the overall implementation.  Business ContextWe are using CDF workflows to populate an Asset Hierarchy data model.The source data comes from multiple systems:SAP Functional locations Equipment AVEVA PI Tag metadata The target asset hierarchy data model contains the following views:Site Area Line Equipment System Subsystem TagThe source metadata arrives without the required treatment, standardization, or contextualization. Before writing to the final data model, the