Latest Contributions by MichaelParma

Just to close the loop on this one. We ended up going in to the datbase and selecting the "Exclude from Application Evaluation" from each attribute rule and this resolved our resolve. Now, I'm not sure why we had to do that when it was working fine 20 minutes earlier. But that's a different story for another time.

Hi Mike, We restarted the service and even republished the service, but the issue persists.

Hi Robert, As suggested, we dropped the topology and removed the laterals from the subnetwork line definition. After enabling the topology and restarting the service, that part seems to have worked well. However, now we are receiving an error that appears to be related to attribute rules and an L### prefix in front of the feature class name. This seems odd as the only change we made we the subnetworkline definition. Let me know if you have ideas or if this warrants a separate post. I'm certain I've seen this before but can't find the resolution again. Many thanks, Mike

Thanks, Robert. I had thought about dropping the laterals from the subnetwork line. In this case, I'm using Esri's base model downloaded from the solutions page. I'm trying to avoid altering the solution configuration to stay as "true" as possible for demonstration purposes. Given the performance is so slow, I may have to resort to a deviation. Thanks, Mike

In the Solution templates, there are related tables for inspections and attachments using the GUID as the primary/foreign key relationship. Does anyone see an issue with recreating these tables using a text field (the assetID) as the relationship? This matches our particular source data. Thanks, Mike

Adding to what Robert said, also be sure to check the "include isolated features" option on the isolation trace to return your hydrants, service connections, storage, etc. -Mike

I'm curious about options to improve drawing performance of the subnetworks when the aggregated geometry is saved. As a specific example, a client has a water system with 3 subnetworks in the pressure tier. Using the default template symbology from the solution, draw times in the web map are <2 seconds with all layers turned on excluding the water network/water pressure. Turning on this layer consistently pushes draw times over 30 seconds. This is confirmed in the ArcGIS Server logs that performance is isolated to this layer. I suspect it is an issue with a complex "spider web" geometry over a wide area that thus lacks a useable spatial index (compared to other features). I suppose a possible workaround is to forgo the water network/water pressure feature and instead symbolize the water lines (mains, services) again based on the pressure subnetwork name. Anyone have suggestions on how to improve the drawing performance of this layer? Thanks, Michael Parma

I've not tried to implement the collaboration myself, but I seem to recall someone recently saying there was a limitation with the number of features that could participate in a collaboration and this may prevent it working with the UN.

Another thing I like to do is go back and check my subnetwork controllers were set on the correct port. It's rather easy to accidentally set a controller on Port 1 when you meant to set it on Port 2. I've inadvertently created multiple controller conflicts several times this way.

‎01-09-2024

Ok, I see what you're saying now. In that data dictionary, the domain appears on water device, but not on hydrant. -Mike

‎01-09-2024

Greetings, I'm curious about people's thoughts on best practice for managing a regional or multi-organization utility network where the centralized organization does not own the data. For example, let's say a regional water provider supplies 2 dozen cities and towns. For the region's business processes, it wants to create a UN to trace out the entire system. Each city owns its data and may have its own schema. In the past, the cities have submitted data which the region consolidated into a geometric network for tracing, basically rebuilding the whole system via script each time. Any thoughts on how to best tackle a consolidation UN when source data comes from multiple organizations with differing non-UN schemas? Thanks, Mike

‎01-09-2024

Hi Gavin, From what I can tell on the data dictionary online, the presentstatus field on water device and fire hydrants uses the Pipeline Device Status domain: (https://solutions.arcgis.com/water/help/water-distribution-utility-network-foundation/DataDictionary/DataDictionary/#Pipeline_Device_Status) Hope this helps, Mike Parma

‎01-05-2024

Thank you, Robert!

‎12-11-2023

There's not really a clean way to do it in earlier versions, but in Pro 3.2 Esri just released a Generate Schema Report geoprocessing tool. Check out the documentation at https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/data/geodatabases/overview/schema-report.htm. It's also the first highlight in the "What's New in ArcGIS Pro 3.2" page. Hope this helps, Mike

‎11-28-2023

@MikeMillerGIS can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the recommended practice in this case is to offset the z-value of the retired asset (e.g. by -1) to avoid the conflict.

Online Status	Offline
Date Last Visited	Tuesday

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by MichaelParma

Re: Drawing Performance: Pressure Subnetwork

Re: Drawing Performance: Pressure Subnetwork

Re: Drawing Performance: Pressure Subnetwork

Re: Drawing Performance: Pressure Subnetwork

Replace Inspection Table Key Relationships

Re: Downstream Tracing

Drawing Performance: Pressure Subnetwork

Re: Utility Network and Distributed Collaboration

Re: facing an issue with creating Multiple subnetwork controllers.

Re: Fire Hydrants, presentstatus, and UN Water Foundation maps

Regional Utility Networks

Re: Fire Hydrants, presentstatus, and UN Water Foundation maps

Re: Understanding Subnetworks: Status

Re: Creating a Data Dictionary for UN

Re: How to exclude the Abandoned or Retired devices in the UN validation?

Re: facing an issue with creating Multiple subnetw...

Re: Understanding Subnetworks: Status

Re: How to exclude the Abandoned or Retired device...

Re: Putting Water, Wastewater/Drainage all in One ...

Re: Associations or Direct Connectivity?

GIS Jobs