5 Reasons Why A Historian Can't Be The Unified Namespace

If you're considering using a Historian as your Unified Namespace, think again.

Why you ask?

Well, here's why:

‍

#𝟏: 𝐋𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐇𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬

‍
Historians cannot typically support change-based notifications or publish-subscribe events.

This limitation is crucial because a unified namespace should ideally facilitate real-time data interaction and dynamic event handling across different applications.

‍

#𝟐: 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

‍
Not all the needed data for UNS is stored by Historians.

The data collected by the Historians might be a subset of the data collected by SCADA or the different PLCs; sometimes, not all the data that is available with other data-gathering techniques is collected and made available by Historians.

It was not designed for holistic data integration from the onset.

‍

#𝟑: 𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞

‍
Most Historians will potentially require proprietary SDKs and client licenses to access data in historians.

This dependency can lead to increased costs and limit the flexibility for broader integration with diverse systems, which is contrary to the concept of a UNS that promotes open and scalable connectivity.

‍

#𝟒: 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐒𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐀𝐝𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧

‍
Adding or changing data sources in a Historian setup might require significant engineering effort.

A true UNS should enable “self-aware” systems that automatically adapt and integrate new data sources or tags.

The existing historian setup might not support such dynamic adaptability, especially when scaling up or modifying system configurations.

‍

#𝟓: 𝐋𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐱 𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐌𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐬

‍
Lastly, data in Historians is usually logged as name-value tags without much context. Requiring you to sift through the time-series data and convert it into useful Information.

Whereas a UNS needs to be a store of modelled, contextualised, normalised, and transformed data ready for use.

Do you have any other reasons why Historians can't be a UNS? Share them in the comments below!"

‍