AF Audit Trail vs. Tycho Data Osprey: Tracking Changes in a Connected PI System

PI Asset Framework Audit Trail and Osprey change tracking address different questions. They can be complementary when teams need both native audit records and broader dependency context.

What AF Audit Trail is for

AF Audit Trail records supported changes within the AF environment when auditing is configured.

It can provide evidence about who changed an audited object, when the change occurred, and what changed.

This native audit capability is important when detailed AF change evidence is required.

What broader observability adds

A cross-system observability view can focus on questions such as:

• Which objects changed?

• Which downstream displays or calculations depend on the changed object?

• Did data health change after the configuration change?

• Are similar changes occurring across several AF databases or systems?

This is an impact and operations view rather than a replacement for the native audit record.

Do not describe the tools as equivalent

Audit evidence and change comparison are not the same thing.

If a workflow requires formal native audit records, use the supported PI audit capability and the organization's compliance process.

Use observability to add dependency, health, and investigation context.

Example workflow

An AF attribute mapping changes.

1. Native audit information can show the recorded AF change when auditing is enabled.

2. Dependency information can show the analyses and displays that use the attribute.

3. Data-quality monitoring can show whether the affected value became stale or abnormal.

4. The team can verify downstream systems after correction.

The practical objective

Use each capability for the question it answers best.

Native audit supports detailed change evidence inside AF. Broader observability supports cross-system impact analysis, health correlation, and faster investigation.