Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add option to change x plot Axis while maintaining time conductor query #2380

Closed
mudinthewater opened this issue Apr 12, 2019 · 10 comments
Closed

Comments

@mudinthewater
Copy link

Would work the same way that the Y-axis drop down does in overlay plots.

Have a use-case where a user would like to query by ERT but plot by SCET range returned. Mostly good for testbed work where scets are pretty useless (they overlap) except in the context of ERT.

Not sure if this is doable in the current version of plotting where data outside the query range is ignored. In the very old version of OpenMCT from a few years ago, it would plot everything you sent it, which I used as a cheat to accomplish this (I'm terrible).

@deeptailor deeptailor added Target:R4.4.1 VISTA R4.4.1 Target:R4.5 and removed Target:R4.4.1 VISTA R4.4.1 labels Apr 14, 2020
@charlesh88
Copy link
Contributor

charlesh88 commented Apr 15, 2020

So we'd do something like this?

  1. Time Conductor set to Fixed ERT with start and end in that format, the data source returns a bunch 'o data.
  2. User changes plot X axis from ERT to SCET.
  3. We determine the earliest and latest SCETs in the current data bounds, then re-query the data source for that plot alone.
  4. Plot displays with well-ordered data based on returned SCET values.
  5. Zooming and panning in the plot would of course be within that time system's context.
  6. If the user diddles (this is a technical term) the Time Conductor settings, the plot repeats step 3 and 4 automatically.

Is this doable with real-time data? For extra credit, allow a gesture to push a given view's time bounds and time system back onto the Time Conductor.

@mudinthewater
Copy link
Author

nooooooooooooooo

@mudinthewater
Copy link
Author

That would be bad

@mudinthewater
Copy link
Author

Basic idea is this - you have a dataset that you want to see in SCET. Let's say this represents a maneuver.

Your dataset took 5s to process on tuesday at 1:05 pm. So you make a query in ERT from 1:04 to 1:05. However, in SCET, the data was actually 4 hours of data, on a completely different day, say wednesday between 1pm and 4pm. You have processed this dataset with 10 different DN/EU conversions about 50x. You don't want to see this data in ERT, where your 4 hours will be squashed into 5s of plot. If you re-query in SCET like you say above, you will get the 49 other times you didn't want.

Basically you'd need to stop dropping data that isn't within the bounds of the original query, then plot with the x-axis that the user selected.

For what it's worth, this is what session filtering is sort of meant to accomplish.

@akhenry
Copy link
Contributor

akhenry commented Apr 16, 2020

@mudinthewater Thanks for the details
@charlesh88 If I'm understanding what @mudinthewater is asking for, I think we can achieve it with what we discussed yesterday afternoon, which doesn't require re-querying. The ERT query gives us all of the data we need, we just need to plot it by SCET instead of ERT. No re-query necessary. We can do this by simply adding an x-axis selector. Actually we'd be restoring something that used to be there (not actually sure what happened to it? Maybe it was removed with the re-implementation of the time conductor to force the user to use the system-wide canonical time system, without considering this particular use case?).

@unlikelyzero
Copy link
Contributor

Will verify in next testathon

@unlikelyzero
Copy link
Contributor

unlikelyzero commented Jul 13, 2021

@kobe1104 and @davetsay to retest in VISTA formal testing

@charlesh88
Copy link
Contributor

Testathon 8-26-21: need testing notes, have no idea how to verify in Open.

@akhenry
Copy link
Contributor

akhenry commented Sep 20, 2021

@davetsay Can we call this verified yet?

@unlikelyzero
Copy link
Contributor

Verified to the best of our ability. Will re-open if this issue is found during VISTA regression testing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants