Author Topic: Possible to limit scope of model search?  (Read 5784 times)

miksko

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Possible to limit scope of model search?
« on: September 26, 2024, 09:29:25 pm »
The Find dialogue lets you limit a search to the selected package and it's content. Apart from that, Sparx EA always search the entire model.

Is it in some way possible to configure what counts as "the entire model"? In our case the model resides in four root packages. Alongside them there is one package for archived/defunct elements and one for personal sandboxes. We want the last two to be excluded from the model search.

Geert Bellekens

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 13387
  • Karma: +564/-33
  • Make EA work for YOU!
    • View Profile
    • Enterprise Architect Consultant and Value Added Reseller
Re: Possible to limit scope of model search?
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2024, 09:54:00 pm »
No not with the standard searches.

What you can do is write SQL searches and use the macro #Branch=<GUID># to exclude the unwanted model root from your search results.

You can share your SQL searches using an MDG technology.

Geert

BobM

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +9/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Possible to limit scope of model search?
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2024, 09:57:43 pm »
lock the package and hide for other groups.
example of package locked on root level



for groups that need to be able to consult but not edit you can alter the visibility levels in the group security settings

This way when using search as a restricted group it will not search in the locked package (here the support root)
Do take in account that in model navigation does works when navigating from a public model towards a hidden model/element
« Last Edit: September 26, 2024, 09:59:58 pm by BobM »

miksko

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Possible to limit scope of model search?
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2024, 12:41:28 am »
Thanks to both of you, Geert and BobM, but I'll start by trying out Bob's solution, for it's simplicity.

Mikael