Add a truly Not Managed option for Relationship Classes

DougBrowning — Fri, 09 Sep 2022 21:39:58 GMT

I have 60 Relationships classes in my DB from a bunch of tables all connected to one master Feature class. (I also have another 30 connecting some of these tables together. So Deletes are rather tricky.)

When using Composite for a RC it will delete the related records - I knew and expected this. What was not very well known is that Simple actually also manages. But instead of deleting the records it changes all their keys to Null. Major bummer as really most think of Simple as un-managed right.

My idea is to add a 3rd option when creating a Relationship Class. Called something like None, or No Management. This option would never do anything at all when deleting. Just leave it all alone and let me manage it.

Only work around I can think of so far. What if I delete from SQL Management Studio instead. I tested this and it seems like going around Arc means I skip the look up and Null the Keys process. My question is will this hurt replication at all? I do not think so as we used to backend data all the time and the A and D tables still pick it up and replicate it.

Thoughts? Other Ideas?

Re: Add a truly Not Managed option for Relationship Classes

EdJuarbe — Fri, 16 Aug 2019 13:23:23 GMT

Another use case is to retain the child foreign key name as a place holder to avoid reusing retired asset numbers. This will make it easier to avoid reusing unique IDs for assets that no longer exist without needing to keep another feature class for retired assets. I don't see why this would be too hard to implement.

idea Add a truly Not Managed option for Relationship Classes in Data Management Ideas

Add a truly Not Managed option for Relationship Classes

Re: Add a truly Not Managed option for Relationship Classes