<?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: Processing speed of Spatial Join vs. Intersect in Geoprocessing Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581441#M19252</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I'm using ArcGIS 10 and running the analysis on shapefiles.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I tried importing the shapefiles to a geodatabase, but it actually took look longer for the analysis (I only tested on the Intersect), another thing that puzzled me.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;An update on this: I was running the script from a created toolbox in ArcMap...I have since tried running the scripts from the command line on my computer, and they run much faster, possibly as much as 5 times faster.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Cody&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:58:03 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>CodySchank</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-09-27T19:58:03Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Processing speed of Spatial Join vs. Intersect</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581439#M19250</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;My experience with these two tools is that Intersect runs much faster than Spatial Join.&amp;nbsp; For 100 files, intersect took about 40 seconds, while Spatial Join took almost 4 minutes.&amp;nbsp; Why the difference in processing time?&amp;nbsp; It seems like Spatial Join is doing a more simplified overlay, and should take less time.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:48:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581439#M19250</guid>
      <dc:creator>CodySchank</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-20T14:48:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Processing speed of Spatial Join vs. Intersect</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581440#M19251</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;What version of ArcGIS are you using?&amp;nbsp; What data source are you using (FGDB, PGDB, SHP, SDE ...)?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Ken&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;ESRI&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Senior Product Engineer (Geoprocessing)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 19:46:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581440#M19251</guid>
      <dc:creator>KenHartling</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-21T19:46:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Processing speed of Spatial Join vs. Intersect</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581441#M19252</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I'm using ArcGIS 10 and running the analysis on shapefiles.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I tried importing the shapefiles to a geodatabase, but it actually took look longer for the analysis (I only tested on the Intersect), another thing that puzzled me.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;An update on this: I was running the script from a created toolbox in ArcMap...I have since tried running the scripts from the command line on my computer, and they run much faster, possibly as much as 5 times faster.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Cody&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:58:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581441#M19252</guid>
      <dc:creator>CodySchank</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-27T19:58:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Processing speed of Spatial Join vs. Intersect</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581442#M19253</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Interesting.&amp;nbsp; Would you be able to provide me with a reproducible case for this so I can take a look? I don't see this behavior in testing here ... so maybe you're data is triggering something that we haven't hit before.&amp;nbsp; I'd need everything to be able to run the case ... the toolbox with script tool and the data.&amp;nbsp; If the data is large it can be uploaded to our ftp server (let me know if you need instructions).&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Ken&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:02:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/geoprocessing-questions/processing-speed-of-spatial-join-vs-intersect/m-p/581442#M19253</guid>
      <dc:creator>KenHartling</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-27T20:02:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

