# Historian Changes in 8.3

**URL:** <https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378>\
**Category:** Ignition\
**Created:** [March 28, 2025, 2:44pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378 "2025-03-28T14:44:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Andre\_Hennecke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e95f7d/32.png) [@Andre\_Hennecke](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Andre_Hennecke)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2025, 2:44pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378/1 "2025-03-28T14:44:32Z")

</div>

Hi,

I read that the historian in version 8.3 will be significantly improved. Does anyone know if these enhancements will also extend to timestamp relations?

We have a use case where we need to relate batch or single-piece data to measurement values. While this can currently be achieved with wide tables by configuring and maintaining an additional database, perhaps we could leverage the new historian. For example, by adding another tag to define the current order/batch start and end times, we might be able to correlate the data via the timestamp.

Maybe this is already possible today, but after first tests, it feels like that correlating via the timestamp is hard for the historian.

Thank you,  
André

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pturmel](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pturmel/32/3295_2.png) [@pturmel](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pturmel)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2025, 3:02pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378/2 "2025-03-28T15:02:34Z")

</div>

> [@Andre\_Hennecke](#):
>
> Maybe this is already possible today

No. The historian architecture does no correlation between different tags going into history as there is no constraint/coordination on value arrival timing and storage.

I've seen nothing in any IA presentations that changes this aspect of the historian architecture.

The reliable way to do what you describe is a triggered transaction group, in OPC read mode, writing to a wide database table. (Or scripted equivalent.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![paul-griffith](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/paul-griffith/32/37249_2.png) [@paul-griffith](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/paul-griffith)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2025, 3:41pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378/3 "2025-03-28T15:41:40Z")

</div>

Phil is correct, there are no change to this to speak of in 8.3.

Use a more fit to purpose tool, such as transaction groups or scripting or (in 8.3) event streams, rather than trying to force the historian into this mode it's not suited for.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Andre\_Hennecke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e95f7d/32.png) [@Andre\_Hennecke](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Andre_Hennecke)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2025, 4:28pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378/4 "2025-03-28T16:28:20Z")

</div>

Thank you both for your feedback. Sounds like I should wait until Event Stream is released.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pturmel](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pturmel/32/3295_2.png) [@pturmel](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pturmel)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2025, 4:59pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/historian-changes-in-8-3/104378/5 "2025-03-28T16:59:16Z")

</div>

I don't see how event streams will help in this case. Tag data will still arrive as separate values.

Use an ordinary table in a database.