Reporting topology errors

[DamienPyne]

Hi

I'm hoping @MikeMillerGIS you can assist here in understanding the output from the "Summerize Utility Network Errors Tool" within UtilityDataManagementSupport toolbox, vs looking at the errors themselves.  At the moment our migration partner is using your tool for reporting which is creating some concerns about volumes.

I have downloaded the toolbox from GitHub - Esri/Utility-Data-Management-Support-Tools at 3.1, but I dont see aligned numbers. We are in the middle of a remigration of data (long story not worth the discussion) and when I use the toolbox for topology error counts there are ~25K errors for Error29 alone reported (item1) but in the network properties there is only ~11K point errors in total (item2), and using SQL at the database supports the network properties, and specifically for error29 only reports 7,904 errors (item3).

Can you please assist in understanding why there are such large numbers reported in the toolbox report.

Thanks Damien

[MikeMillerGIS]

Some UN errors represent more than one error and some UN errors are reported more than once.  For instance, No Junction Edge rule.  That is reported by the UN on the Junction and the Edge, so 2 errors.  We only report that once in summarize.

The number of errors will be different.  We are reporting on the unique set of errors.

[DamienPyne]

Thanks Mike, but what about specific examples like E29 where this should not have 2 feature classes driving the results and therefore increasing the number?   And the fact this particular error is showing 25K errors while the network property value is 11K in total for points or 15K in total for all errors?

This is an important item as for this error type has never been high (under 1000 on our original go live on UNv3) and is now significantly higher (25K). I am trying to determine the correct reporting and focus of the issue.

[MikeMillerGIS]

Anyway we can get a copy of the dirty area table?  We have made some changes in the 3.3 version of the tools, any chance you can run them?

[DamienPyne]

Possible to share let me get back to you, and yes I can hook up a 3.3 with the tool and review.

[MikeMillerGIS]

What is the error message in the Dirty Area on error 29.  Does it provide the GUIDs of all controllers in errors?  Our guess is that we are creating an error for everything guid in the that error.  On 3.1, the logic to remove duplicates had some issues.

[DamienPyne]

I will let you know when I have some 3.3 with the tool.  This is the quick def query view of the data.  I am expecting about 8000 errors so hopefully 3.3 provides an aligned output.

[DamienPyne]

@MikeMillerGIS yes looks like its better in 3.3.  Is that something you are looking to correct for 3.1?