Greg_at_ils

I think for PSS to be viable with a remote server they need to figure out how to resolve the lagging issue I experienced which made it impossible to work effectively. PSS works best on a LAN server where your speeds are fast enough and latency low enough you don't experience any lags. Over a cloud connection it just doesn't perform well enough. I can only speculate that it has something to do with how and how often it communicates with the server so even on VCS the server application would need to be improved somehow. I would certainly give my vote for doing this. I think the PSS direction is the better way to go.

Correct. This is what we experienced. What I was trying to describe is as you noted, it's 2 steps for each user with file sharing. This is what I mean by more syncing. You have to commit those changes locally to the project file and then Dropbox has to upload the changes to that project file. Then other users have to do this in reverse. They have to download those changes to their local copy of the project file and then it can sync with the user file. While DB is syncing those project file changes in the background it has locked the project file and other users can't sync, commit or even check out other items. This doesn't happen with the server application. In the end it's slower overall using file sharing from my experience with it. I have no idea if this is true as I imagine that it has a lot to do with the how each system chooses to package and transmit that information. Interesting question though.

Yes, we certainly make an effort to be as disciplined and structured as possible but it rarely works out like you describe in reality because there are just too many dependencies, both physically within VW and in general with project workflows, time tables, manpower, etc, to feasibly keep it this strict.

I think what Rick is saying is that with a cloud based file service like Dropbox there is essentially more syncing happening because not only are the changes being sent back and forth between working files and the project file but the project file, and sometimes both files, are then also being sync'd in both locations. That project file has to exist on everyones computer. In addition, the Project File is only able to be updated by one working file at a time in this setup. With the server application the project file only exists on the server and the working file only exists on the users computer. Only the changes are sent back and forth while also being able to support multiple working file updates at a time.

Thanks for the insight @Lyuben. It was an interesting experiment setting up PSS on an AWS server. I had high hopes since we've had such great success doing this with Revit and Revit Server. I have to say that other than the performance issue we saw while working in a file, as I noted above, VW worked quite well seemingly solving all the other "wobbly" issues we normally deal with while using Dropbox and file syncing. This gives me some hope for future improvements. To that end I hope you guys are considering how PSS and project sharing in general might be enhanced to overcome this.

Exactly our experience.

Thought I would cross link the below related thread... As I noted in the above linked thread, I think it would be quite valuable for the developers to consider improving upon the Project Sharing Server to optimize it for remote access. I think it has the potential to make project sharing a much better experience, particularly when you get more than a few users sharing a project file. We've been using Revit Server like this for a little while now and it has been splendid. The benefits over file based sharing with something like Dropbox become magnified the more users that are sharing the project file.

If TRACE is not recognizing the annotation layer within the PDF it not likely to work with Preview annotations either. Hopefully I'm wrong but if not one would need to flatten the PDF first and then import into TRACE. Unfortunately you can't edit them then. Sounds like a TRACE feature request. @Christiaan, did you ever make a decision on using this app or something else?

I'm just rediscovering TRACE after experimenting with it when it first appeared. It's really evolved into quite a slick app in so many ways. After looking at many of the other apps noted here I think I'm going to try it out more extensively and see if it's something I can make part of my workflow. I would love for an app like this to have a plugin in VW to more easily and extensively exchange content. Been longing for a workflow like that for some time.

This is my main fear as well and frankly it's going to happen to some applications that just don't have a big enough user base to justify supporting it. In particular I worry about the ability to virtualize Windows for those applications that have never been made for the Mac. I already have one mission critical application that does not and will not support Catalina and never will so I'm scrambling to find a replacement while stuck on 10.14. I also have another mission critical application we run via VM Ware and it would really suck to have to buy separate windows machines to run this one title. I'll be upgrading my 2017 MBP to the new 16" to hedge my bets for a while. I already have 2020 iMacs for others.

Yea, me too. I'm already pushing VW to the limit so Rosetta or virtualization are not appealing options for very long. It was a rough transition the first go around for some software. I am however excited at the potential performance improvements this could bring.

If you're looking for a cloud based RFI solution then PlanGrind is better for you assuming that you're looking for something more than just marking up a PDF. Revu and PlanGrid are quite different. I find it hard to compare them. I use Revu as my default PDF application and have used PlanGrid on various projects as part of the entire project teams effort. Using one does not preclude using the other. For example I would still use Revu as my PDF application even if I had PlanGrid. Revu is really just a PDF markup application with some nice purpose built features for the architectural and engineering industry. PlanGrid is a whole ecosystem built around drawings and other documents that is highly integrated with workflows for RFis, submittals, Punch Lists, task management etc. The pricing structure is different too. PlanGrid gets quite expensive with it's monthly fee vs the one time cost of Revu. Both are great for what they are but I wouldn't compare them.

I'm not confident this is going to be what it would need to be. Cloud based apps are fine as long as they do not always need the cloud. As long as there is a desktop companion application that can be used when you don't have a connection then it's fine but otherwise I find it useless.

Glad to hear!

Basically what I'm looking to do is populate the location field in my symbol record with the name of the space or polygon the symbol is located within. I would like to be able to move my symbols around and have their location automatically update. The criteria you mention works the opposite way where you have to know the name of the object and it gives you what symbols are within it.

Does anyone know if there is a worksheet function by which I can find the name of a named object where a symbol is physically within it's boundaries? So if I have a symbol within the boundaries of a space object, I want to pull the name of that space object onto a worksheet that lists the symbols. I know there is a criteria that allows you to list the symbols that are within a specific named object like a space but I want to go the other way and find the name of that object the symbols are within. I hope that makes sense. Thanks, Greg

Thanks Pat. I was able to figure it out and made my first four scripts using similar concepts! Greg

Robert's post is great. Thanks for pointing that out. Your code does compile, thanks. I will dive into the help files to see what I need to add to do the pen settings. I appreciate your help. Greg

Thanks Pat. I was hoping for that answer. At least it's possible. I've been trying to read up on VS to understand how to do this but there's a bit of learning curve. I tried your code and I get an error in the first line: Line #1: H1:=FSymDef; | { Error: Identifier not declared. } Greg

Do any of you scripting gurus know if it is possible to make VW edit every symbol in a drawing and change the pen or fill setting of the symbols components? Greg

Is there still not a way to do this without writing some VS?

Does anyone know if it is possible to set a text fill for the position name or any part of the position summery for that matter?

I thought I would update this old post of mine as I have a workaround that has solved this issue for me. The original problem of the plotter auto flipping the drawing was a result of trying to use an "oversize" or "super" page size. For example, if you select the normal 24"x36" or D size page in your page setup, the VW page size is actually 22"x34" and your plotter margins are added to that. As you go up in page size, this wasted space gets larger. An E size page will have a VW page size of 34"x44". I find that to be a lot of wasted space. The HP 500 is capable of printing with margins of .2 and .67. I personally make my margins .5 and .67 which should be plenty for any other plotter to print my drawings. The workaround is simple. You need only make a custom page size with the dimensions flipped. If you want a 24"x36" or D size page, you make a custom page size with the dimensions of 36"x24" (width x height). Leave your margins at the default for the plotter or if you change them, make sure the Top and Bottom margins are the larger ones. This tricks the plotter into thinking you are printing in portrait. Your portrait and landscape settings will therefore be reversed. That's it! This has worked every time for me regardless of the page size I use.

Please please please make this happen. I find this such a limiting aspect of worksheets. We discussed this issue again in my user group meeting as one of the reasons people don't utilize worksheets more.

I think I found a bug. Maybe someone can confirm for me. When trying to use the "Location" criteria in a worksheet, it only works with generic 2d polygons and not the Space Planning "Space" polygon. Basically it can recognize that symbols are NOT within a Space Planning "Space" but does not recognize them when they are inside this polygon which leads me to believe that this is a bug.