<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Branch Version Sql Views - Utility Network in ArcGIS Utility Network Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1623820#M5368</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;This thread is in response to this article:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/td-p/1623753" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/td-p/1623753&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Materialized views aren't available on all platforms, so in some cases, you would be writing the contents of the branch version analytics to a table for reporting purposes. For the sake of this comment, I'll just assume you're using a materialized view.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would typically create a materialized view on the separate tables first. That way when I need to create a second or third report using any of those tables I can just use the tables I've already materialized.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Creating a materialized view that contains a join for those tables will probably take longer than materializing the tables separately, especially once you bring the associations table into the mix. If this is a one-off, and the performance is better this way, then go ahead. But as soon as you need to make a second or third materialized view you will likely find the approach outlined in the article will be more scalable.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2025 13:04:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>RobertKrisher</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-06-16T13:04:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Branch Version Sql Views - Utility Network</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1623753#M5367</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.esri.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/138089"&gt;@RobertKrisher&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;can you elaborate a bit more on materialized views VS regular views ? I cannot find information about performance assessment or the use of views for data access.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ex : I want to join rows in the electricJunctionObjects with their associated features so I can create a view that allows me to zoom to each object.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Should I create a standard or a materialized view with a JOIN, or create separate materialized views for electricJunctionObject and electricDevice first, then create a JOIN view against them ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2025 02:56:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1623753#M5367</guid>
      <dc:creator>PierreloupDucroix</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-16T02:56:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Branch Version Sql Views - Utility Network</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1623820#M5368</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;This thread is in response to this article:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/td-p/1623753" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/td-p/1623753&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Materialized views aren't available on all platforms, so in some cases, you would be writing the contents of the branch version analytics to a table for reporting purposes. For the sake of this comment, I'll just assume you're using a materialized view.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would typically create a materialized view on the separate tables first. That way when I need to create a second or third report using any of those tables I can just use the tables I've already materialized.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Creating a materialized view that contains a join for those tables will probably take longer than materializing the tables separately, especially once you bring the associations table into the mix. If this is a one-off, and the performance is better this way, then go ahead. But as soon as you need to make a second or third materialized view you will likely find the approach outlined in the article will be more scalable.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2025 13:04:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1623820#M5368</guid>
      <dc:creator>RobertKrisher</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-16T13:04:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Branch Version Sql Views - Utility Network</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1624064#M5372</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Interesting! So the first step is to create materialized views for all the tables we'll use for analysis or export purposes, and to create a refresh function.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In addition to the join view, we need to create a view on the association table for exports, but based on your message, it would be more appropriate to also create a materialized view for this table and refresh it just before exporting.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Similarly, for visualization purposes (e.g., a dashboard with equipment symbolized by its last maintenance status), we could consider a standard view based on the materialized views of equipment and maintenance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2025 21:13:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1624064#M5372</guid>
      <dc:creator>PierreloupDucroix</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-16T21:13:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Branch Version Sql Views - Utility Network</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1624294#M5374</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;That all seems reasonable.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2025 13:50:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-questions/re-branch-version-sql-views-utility-network/m-p/1624294#M5374</guid>
      <dc:creator>RobertKrisher</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-17T13:50:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

