Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - kepNCI

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
Bugs and Issues / Alternate Images and Microsoft Cursor Error
« on: October 03, 2012, 12:23:41 am »
Occassionally on my deployment diagrams when using an aternate image with visible attributes (tags and notes) I receive the following error when I attempt to save the diagram:

Microsoft Cursor Error [-2147467259]
Data provider or other service returned an E_FAIL status

Appears to be associated with the placement of the visible attributes of the ogject using the alternate image. If I move the attributes (not the image) to another location in the diagram the error sometimes goes away. I have yet to determine a consistent condition(s) that always causes the error.

Any ideas?  It is happening more that I would like and takes a good bit of playing around with the daigram to get a good save.


Bugs and Issues / physical (visual) arrangement of ports on node
« on: June 21, 2012, 04:54:55 am »
I have a network node with 13 sets of 12 ports.  On a diagram I try to evenly space a node within each group and then separate each group by even more space. The purose of the diagram is not only to document the network config, but also to use a printed view for management, thus I am trying to make the diagram visually attractive as well as functional.

Why does moving one port for better visual placement effect the position of other ports. Almost appears that EA is trying to control some grouping of some of the ports, but the grouping does not make any sense. It is making it impossible to make a nice looking dagram.

Uml Process / Tracing network device locations
« on: February 22, 2015, 01:30:15 am »
Looking for suggestions on the best UML elements and connections for representing geographical locations and relationships with network devices in such a way that one can trace the location of a given network device.

For the network devices, I already have a package and deployment diagram for each type of network device types (server, router, switch, etc.) as well as stereotypes defined in an MDG for each type from which I create instances for each network device in the respective deployment diagram. Most of my network devices have a tag for location, which is populated from values obtained from our discovery tools. However the goal is to have a complete traceable relationship to its location, which I believe implies some relationship connections as well as package hierarchy for locations in browser.  

This is what I have tried so far:
I created another package called Facility Locations and an associated Facility Locations diagram. Under the Facility Locations package, I have a package for each country. Under country I have a package for each location/city, then under city I have a package for building. Thus in the project browser one can see the geographical country, city/location, building hierarchy of where we own/manage network devices. Then in the Facility Locations diagram, I basically duplicate the same hierarchy structure, by dragging each geographical package as a package element and then connecting them appropriately using a nesting connection.

Then under the package for each building I have a deployment diagram onto which I drag links to the device instances that are located in the building. To create a traceable link between device and building, I also dragged the associated package for the building as a package element onto the diagram and link each device using a nested connection.

Now when I click on a network device, I can trace its location within the traceability window.

- Can you think of a better way that may be more UML compliant?
- Are package elements the best element to use for defining a geographical location?
- Is the nesting connection the best relationship connection?  Seems to be the only choice for connecting the package elements.
- Is the nesting connection the best relationship connection to associate the device node to the building package element? When you use the quick link from the node to the package, nesting connection is not an option, however, EA allows one to use the nesting connection from the toolbox to create the link.  Does that mean I am not UML compliant?

Uml Process / Capturing port details on switches, routers, etc.
« on: October 31, 2013, 05:18:24 am »
I am using EA to document our production network config, mainly for the purpose of future design. I want to capture the some port details on switches, routers, etc. I know UML does not offer any guidelines for network configuration. Visually on the diagram I see two ways of doing it and was wondering if anyone has any experience and/or suggestions as to which would be better for not only the visual diagram, but also for reporting/documentation.
1) actually link a port stereotype on the node and make the communication connection to the port.
2) do not use the port, but instead make the communication connection to the node, but then use the communication connection's source/target qualifier properties to name the port.

Uml Process / UML relationship between cluster and server
« on: February 21, 2013, 04:59:04 am »
I have defined our network devices, including servers and clusters.
I now want to create a relationship between a cluster and the servers that make up the cluster.  Which UML relationship best describes the relationship between a cluster and its servers? I am thinking just an association connection.


Uml Process / node vs deivce (EA bug or UML restriction)
« on: September 28, 2012, 04:31:14 am »
I created a profile for generating network deployment diagrams. I created device stereotypes for all of the hardware including servers. This seems to be in agreement of what I read about devices in that it is just a stereotype for a node which represents a physical piece of hardware.

That being the case, why when I use the Advanced/Parnet... function only stereotypes derived from node are displayed as a choice. None of the device stereotypes are selectable. Is this an EA bug or is there a UNL rule that prohibits a device from being a parent?


Uml Process / Icon in Node
« on: August 30, 2012, 04:44:40 am »
Some of the EA supplied stereotypes for a Node have a small icon in the upper right hand corner of the node rectancle.
Are these icons defined by UML (as in the case of the component icon)?
Is there a way to add your own icon to node and device stereotypes that are user created?
(if so, would hope that it also works for stereotypes defined within an MDG profile).

In my MDG's custom toolbox I am creating a page for common database tools as well as some custom stereotypes. For example, I have included the standard table element by inserting an attribute:

UML::Table = Table

I would also like to include EA's view and procedure stereotypes. Tried:
UML::View = View
UML::Procedure = Procedure
but it does not work.

Any suggestions?

Just curious if others have this minor issue.  
Since upgrading to v11, documents that include diagrams which have their property option set for "Divide Diagram into Multiple Pages" are only generating the first page in the doc.
To fix, I have to open the properties for the diagram, click the Diagram tab and then click OK, which one would think does nothing, but now when generating the document, all pages of the diagram are displayed.  

In my RTF template, I set the package name to "Heading 1". The RTF generator correctly creates the child package name with the Heading 2, Heading 3, etc.
I am using a style sheet template to define the Headings. Only Heading 1 has a page break preceding it.

When the RTF generator creates the output document, it assigns the correct Heading x style to the package name and displays the correct formatting, EXCEPT, the generator is formatting a page break for all Headings, not just Heading 1. I am assuming this is a bug in that it is picking up the Page Beak defined for Heading 1 and applying it to all Heading x created for the child packages.

FYI:: While I am using v11 and style templates, I think the same issue was in earlier releases when I defined the header styles as part of the main template. It also does not make any difference which document type you select for the output.

I am trying to create a customized version of v11's Data Modeling Report and its associated fragments. I started by making copies of the report, the database fragments and the Template Selector fragment so that I have them under User Templates and thus can modify it.

I am confused on how this report includes the Database Table fragment. In the Data Modeling Report within the element section there is the inclusion of:
{Template - Template Selector

When you view this fragment, it only consists of the section:
custom >

that is, no inclusion of the Database Table fragment, yet somehow it pulls in the Database Table fragment.
In my case I want it to pull in my customized Database Table fragment, but cannot figure out how to change it. I am assuming there is some code or query associated with the Template Selection template, but do not know how to view/modify it.

What am I missing?

I have succeeded in embarrassing myself.
Over a year ago I had created an RTF template that closely matched our company’s Word templates. It actually works very nice.  It has a cover sheet with a header where I have an image. The actual image extends beyond the header margin and down the left side of the entire page and text in the header as well as the page flows over the image. I am able to click on the image and position it accurately on the page.  
I now want to change the template to match new company guidelines, but for the life of me, I cannot determine how I did it.

If I select “Insert Picture”, it embeds the picture in line with the text with the text flowing around it and header margin increases so that the entire image is within the header margin, pushing the start of the actual page area down.

If I select “Background” the image fills the entire page with no capability for positioning it or resizing the image.

Also does not look like I used frames or object drawing.  

I do not know how I did it. Only clue is that when looking at the header with the Paragraph Marking icon on, not only do you see the image, but in the text line, you also see a small icon of the image that is the same size as a text character. If you click on that small icon image, the actual image is selected. Repositioning the actual image does not change the position of the small icon.  The size of the header remains relational to the text only, allowing the actual image to extend beyond the header margin. I now want to do the same thing. Anyone know how I did this?  Was it a capability in release 9 that I cannot create in 10 or am I missing something?  

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / MDG generation sleeping?
« on: October 30, 2013, 12:20:41 am »
Just being curious. I have a custom MDG technology that includes a profile with quite a few node stereotypes, several toolboxes, several diagrams, rtf templates and some included images. When generating the MDG (using an MTS file) sometimes it proceeds thru each step of the MDG wizard quite fast, completing the generation within 15 seconds or so, but more often than not, it seems to go to sleep toward the last couple steps, like before the image selection or at the end. If I wait, it will complete, but sometime it will be several minutes.

Anyone else experience this? Have any idea what could be causing such a difference in generation time of the same MDG?

I have an MDG with a profile that defines 14 stereotypes used for network diagraming It alos has an associated toolbox and digram profile. All 14 stereotypes are created the same way, that is,
in the profile:
- all stereotypes objects extend to the same Node metaclass object.
- Their attributes structure are the same in that each have:
  - an _metatype with a unique value (such as Router, Server. etc.),
  - an _image with a decloration script to provide icon on the steretype object,
  - an icon attribute to provide a similar icon in the project prowser
  - unique set of attributes for creation of tags.
- The default appearace for each object is set so that most have a unique background color.

When I create an new object on a diagram using the MDG's stereotypes, all is well, except for two. In these two stereotypes, EA does not include the <<stereotype name>> above the object name and there is another icon under the defined _image icon (you can see it around the edges of the defined image). The dafault color, tags and object name as well as the name of the Stereotype in the object's General properties are OK.  I suspect that EA is getting confused with another stereotype of the same name. In my MDG the names are "Server" and "Storage", but I can see in the list of stereotypes that there was also a "server" and "storage". I know that in some functions when EA looks up stereotypes, it ignores case as well as the generating MDG, apparently picking the first stereotype in the return query. In an effort to correct the problem, under UML Types I deteted "server" and "storage" stereotypes and then removed all MDG technologies except Basic, Simple, Code and my MDG. The "server" and "storage" stereotypes now do not show up in either UML Type list nor for stereotypes in the object's general properties, yet the generated object are still displayed without the <<stereotype name>> and the corrupted _image decloration iocn.

If this is just a display issue, then it is not a huge problem, but I am concerned that these two object are being creating differently internally than the other stereotypes which may cause issues later. For example if I start using API to access the objects.

Other than using a different name in my MDG, is there a way to fix this?

Can one change the default toolbox associated with an existing diagram?(or change its type of diagram from Deployment to the custom deployment diagram, which I would assume would also change its default toolbox?)

I have some deployment diagrams that were created before we started to use a custom deployment diagram which has a custom toolbox. I do not want to redo the existing diagrams, but it would be nice if I could effectively change their default toolbox to the custom toolbox rather than the Deployment toolbox so that I do not have to use the "More tools..."  (Ya, I'm lazy).


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4