Issue with relationship class in ArcGIS Enterprise 10.6.1

05-10-2019 06:33 AM
New Contributor III


I'm facing an issue with relationship class in ArcGIS Enterprise :

I've created a new project in ArcGIS Pro 2.2.3 with :

- One feature class Origine (with a global ID)

- One feature class Destination1 (with a GUID attribute named f_id)

- One feature class Destination2 (with a GUID attribute named f_id)

- One composite / 1-m relationship class between Origine (GlobalId) > Destination1 (f_id)

- One composite / 1-m relationship class between Origine (GlobalId) > Destination2 (f_id)

See attached file ArcGISPro_01.png

In ArcGIS Pro, everything works perfectly, especially when I delete a feature from Origine, linked feature in Destination1 and Destination2 are also deleted.

Now, I'm publishing the map in a all-in-one installation of ArcGIS Enterprise 10.6.1 (ArcGIS Server/Portal/Relational datastore). If I try to do the same (i.e. deleting a feature form Origine table), then I can see that only linked feature from the first relationship is deleted ...

See attached files Portal_xx.png

it seems that ArcGIS Enterprise does not iterate on all the relationship of the Origine layer, but only consider the first one !?

Is ArcGIS Enterprise support only one composite relationship for an origin table ?

I didn't see anything about such a limitation or bug in the ESRI online help or identified issues.

So any help welcome.


Julien L.

Tags (1)
0 Kudos
3 Replies
New Contributor III

I've continued my tests and add a third destination3 table with the same kind of relationship class from Origine table to this table (composite / 1-m).

Same behavior :

- Works in ArcGIS Pro

- In ArcGIS Enterprise : only linked features from first relationship are well deleted

If I look at the Origine layer rest API, this is exactly the first relation listed in the Relationship section that is working well 

And, finally, note that if I publish from ArcGIS Pro exactly the same project in AGOL instead of ArcGIS Enterprise, I don't have the problem, all relations are well considered

0 Kudos
by Anonymous User
Not applicable

Same issue.

0 Kudos
New Contributor

Same issue... anyone know how to fix this?

0 Kudos