topic Re: License issue, any way around this? in Python Questions

License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 20:26:03 GMT

I am going through and adding fields to featureclasses when I came across this error. We have 2 licenses (Standard/Basic) and on the basic level I get the error and on the Standard level it runs just fine. I am wondering if there is any way around this without upgrading or having to switch licenses just to run my script. I am also worried that by running this with the standard license that I will not be able to ever run it with the basic. I understand the obvious answer is to upgrade but I thought I would see what some other options are.

ExecuteError: ERROR 999999: Error executing function.

The application is not licensed to create or modify schema for this type of data

Failed to execute (AddField).

Thanks!

Chris

Re: License issue, any way around this?

DarrenWiens2 — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 20:30:51 GMT

What is the type of data you are trying to create or modify when this error occurs?

Re: License issue, any way around this?

RebeccaStrauch__GISP — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 20:37:19 GMT

I'm assuming your Standard and Basic licenses are concurrent/floating and not single-user? If so, check out

Accessing licenses and extensions in Python—Help | ArcGIS for Desktop

With will let you build in the ability to check if the Standard license is available, checkit out, run your program, and then check it back in. If it's a fairly short script, that may work (unless your Standard license is always tied up, or if they are standalone/single-user...in which case, this wouldn't help).

Re: License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 21:58:24 GMT

It is concurrent and usually tied up during the day for testing but could work overnight. Do you know if I alter the tables with the Standard will it make it so the rest of my data then will need a standard license to be altered in the future?

Re: License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 21:59:04 GMT

it's just an addField on a featureclass table in a GDB.

Re: License issue, any way around this?

DarrenWiens2 — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 22:01:41 GMT

I don't think this is a licensing level issue. You can certainly add a field with basic licensing.

edit: is this an SDE GDB? if so, you will have issues with basic licensing.

Re: License issue, any way around this?

RebeccaStrauch__GISP — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 22:15:56 GMT

You can take a look at the functionality matrix Functionality Matrix for ArcGIS 10 and Server | ArcGIS Blog to see if the specific task you are trying to do is supported by the Basic level or not. I know there are some restrictions with what you can do with "Distributed Geodatabases" and multi-user databases, but I agree with Darren, you should be able to add a field....but it does depend on what type of data you are working with. (rasters and images may have license level restrictions). Are you using Spatial Analyst with your Standard license for example....may be the extension that is needed and not the level.

Also, maybe there is a data lock and therefore schema lock on the data that could block it (can not change schema if anyone is in the file or if it is being used). things like that. Also, if it's versioned, I recommend rolling it back (i.e. reconciling and getting rid of versions) and getting the status ID = 0 before changing a schema. This might be more than you are dealing with, but wanted to mention.

btw - typically you shouldn't mark your own response as "helpful" unless it has something that is helping resolve the issues or will help others.

Re: License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 22:16:15 GMT

It's not an SDE GDB... That's why I thought it was strange. But i tested it with the Standard license and there was no issue.

Re: License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 22:20:36 GMT

That's why I am wondering if there is something strange with creating a FGDB with one license level and then trying to alter it with another. I'll take a look at the matrix but it seems really wrong that I wouldn't be able to do something basic like add a field. Regardless of which license level I was using. Thanks for the info(I also didn't mean to mark my post as helpful, sorry).

Re: License issue, any way around this?

RebeccaStrauch__GISP — Thu, 09 Apr 2015 22:24:38 GMT

No, which level creates it, or which machine (unless it's a permission issue???) should NOT (oops...missing "not" in first version)matter.

In case it's a permission thing....have you tried copying it over to the Basic machine and running it local...making sure the permissions are set? if it works that was, then I would look at the permissions for the file between the machines.

Re: License issue, any way around this?

XanderBakker — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 02:04:41 GMT

After reading through all the post, I am wondering if you may have attachments or a relationship class defined on the featureclass. This will require a standard license to change the schema (like,add a field).

Re: License issue, any way around this?

JayantaPoddar — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 06:06:46 GMT

Hi Chris,

As far as I know, you can not modify FGDB with Basic license. Here are the two workarounds.

1) Upgrade to at least standard license (You don't want it).

2) Export the feature classes in FGDB to PGDB/Shapefiles using the Standard license that you have. Then, you can modify the PGDB/Shapefiles.

Thanks,

Jay

Re: License issue, any way around this?

DarrenWiens2 — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 06:08:35 GMT

You can definitely add a field to a FGDB with basic license. I do it all the time.

Re: License issue, any way around this?

SepheFox — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 06:51:21 GMT

I wonder if the error is something else altogether? Can you post your script?

Re: License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 12:50:07 GMT

Is there a way to tell if there is a relationship class attached to it?

Re: License issue, any way around this?

XanderBakker — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 13:08:46 GMT

Yes, as describe here: Re: Detect Relationship in Feature Class or Table

Re: License issue, any way around this?

ChrisBrannin — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 14:36:15 GMT

This was the issue. We use annotation layers and sure enough there is a relationshipclass on the file it errored on. Thank you, and everyone else for the great help on this.