<?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: Support for 9.x FGDB in File Geodatabase API Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473536#M792</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;No.&amp;nbsp; The simplification of the geodatabase storage model at 10.0 made it&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;possible to offer the FGDB API.&amp;nbsp; Supporting the earlier model would be&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;much more difficult.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;- V&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:43:26 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>VinceAngelo</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-01-18T17:43:26Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Support for 9.x FGDB</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473535#M791</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Is ESRI planning on adding support for FGDB's created in 9.x anytime soon?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:45:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473535#M791</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrianBehling</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-18T16:45:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Support for 9.x FGDB</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473536#M792</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;No.&amp;nbsp; The simplification of the geodatabase storage model at 10.0 made it&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;possible to offer the FGDB API.&amp;nbsp; Supporting the earlier model would be&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;much more difficult.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;- V&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:43:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473536#M792</guid>
      <dc:creator>VinceAngelo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-18T17:43:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Support for 9.x FGDB</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473537#M793</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I might add that "upgrading" a file geodatabase from 9 to 10 causes problems with the API.&amp;nbsp; The only free-and-clear migration path is to create a new 10.x file gdb and copy the datasets to it.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:08:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473537#M793</guid>
      <dc:creator>MarkCederholm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-22T21:08:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Support for 9.x FGDB</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473538#M794</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;What problems are you seeing when you use an upgraded 9.x file geodatabase?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:55:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/support-for-9-x-fgdb/m-p/473538#M794</guid>
      <dc:creator>LanceShipman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-23T14:55:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

