copy of a maestro view and chnaging design cause all the setup to be lost

The only case I can think of where the outputs would go missing is if the design is pointed to something that doesn't exist (which would be tricky if you just selected it). Then I might expect other things to go missing too - because the sub-ADE session can't initialise. Is it a config view configuring a design that doesn't exist?

Otherwise, please contact customer support - we need to see this to understand what is happening. This is not something I see or would expect.

Andrew

what you said is true (pointing to a non existing cell), but in my case I have valid cells (all schematics). It is happening to another colleague as well. I'll open a ticket

How do you copy the maestro state (or whole test-bench)?  
We used to have the same problem. If using the right-click-copy to create a copy this problem showed up. 
If you copy it via the copy wizard it works fine - at least it always does for my colleagues and me - . There's also no need to 'change design'  as it points to the correct one out of the box.
  

thanks, that works!

thanks, that works!

The important aspect of how you copy (from the library manager) is that you should use the "update instances" checkbox on the copy, and copy both the design(s) and the maestro view at the same time. Then all the references can be updated to point at the new copy rather than the original data.

Doesn't really explain why Tommaso's problem was occurring in the first place, but at least it might give a workaround.

Andrew

yes i know about the importance of "update istances".
i tried the method above, but then when I was doing a copy of the "test", by simply coyping the test I lost all the ADE outputs/variables/analysis. 

TommasoF said:

i tried the method above, but then when I was doing a copy of the "test", by simply coyping the test I lost all the ADE outputs/variables/analysis.

Which is odd, hence hopefully being investigated via the customer support route.

Andrew

honestly, my impression is that IC23 has more bugs than IC618. E. G. the setting on the Y axis in viva does not work properly, and small stuff like that. I could open a  ticket for each of these, but then I would stop working.. Pretty disappointing to see a worsening  in a newer versions...

That's not what we see in general. Yes of course things do occasionally break (as they did in hotfixes of IC618), but I do not see a worse quality problem than in IC618.

What do you mean by "the setting on the Y axis in viva does not work properly"? 

Andrew

to get the scaling between 0 and 10mA  with the desired step size in this plot it took me a while, by default when entering the numbering and clicking apply it was reverting back to the original range. I did plenty of times in IC618 and never seen this.
Thanks
Tommaso

I didn't see this reply (I'm having some issues with not all posts generating a notification). Anyway, the only way I can get this to misbehave is to leave the Mode as "AutoScale" and then use toggle the little arrow next to Axis Limits down and up so I can edit the min and max fields, and then apply - if I do that it discards the change because it's still auto-scaling (in my view it shouldn't really allow them to be editable in this case). Otherwise it seems to work fine. 

There have been fixes during IC23.1 to the axis editing (to fix other earlier bugs); I guess it is possible that in some situation it's broken something else - but I am a bit surprised that the basic changes you are describing here are not working.

Andrew