Add a geodatabase feature that is a simple organization tool (e.g. folders) that doesn't add any functionality to the data or impose any restrictions like the feature dataset imposes.
We have so many layers etc. that some users have started calling SDE the "data dumpster".This is exactly how the original DOS operating system started out. There were no folders, and all files were stored in the single root directory. When users listed files, they saw every file name.Which reminds me, the original DOS also restricted file names to 8 characters. While SDE allows more than 8, it is limited to the database table limits. There is no reason "layers" etc. could not be abstract synonyms which would allow 128+ characters, including spaces!
If ESRI could provide this ability, I wouldn't have this problem:https://c.na1.visual.force.com/apex/ideaView?id=087300000008G0I&returnUrl=%2Fapex%2FideaList%3Fc%3D0...
Being able to implement a sub-directory structure as well as a directory/folder structure to geodatabase features would further ease the organisation of layers in a geodatabase.
It seems strange that shapefiles can be organised this way but not any layers involving a DBMS like Oracle or SQL Server, even though the latter is the newer technology.
Without any adequate means of organising geodatabase features, finding a layer to add to a map can involve having to scroll through hundreds of irrelevant layers, made even more difficult from the fact that the "Add Data" dialog box cannot show very many layers at once, being so small and not resizable.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.