Latest Contributions by TedCronin

Excellent.  Thank you. The less I have to deal with the registry the better, since I support the Mappers, and then would have to do this on everyones machine. BTW, how do I delete a session?  Seems like this should be pretty stupid easy.  Am I missing something, Am I just stupid? ... View more

Alright, Thank you for getting back to me, I guess Kumar did not want to play with me on these forums anymore... ... View more

There is not a limitation on the number of domains per feature class Reviewer can check that I know of.  But there was a limit to how many values (5,000) are in a domain that the Reviewer Domain check can validate.  This has been addressed at 10. Ok, good to know. There is a limitation of how many records the browse features dialog can load, I think it's about 15,000.   Yep, I concur, tested... Was the reviewer workspace you were writing the errors to a personal geodatabase?  I know that there is a 2GB limit for an MS Access database.  You can try writing to a file geodatabase as your Reviewer Workspace.   File GB, who uses PGDB anymore 🙂 BTW, what version are you using?    10 When running a batch job, errors that are returned from the checks are stored in a temporary workspace before they are written to the Reviewer table.  That temporary workspace was a personal geodatabase.  We made a fix in the 10 release so that the temporary workspace is now a file geodatabase because people were reaching that 2GB MS Accces database limit since they had so many errors being returned. This explains a lot of why I have had previous issues with Reviewer all the way back to 92. We test big datasets, so good...  Hopefully with SP1 for core, perf will get a lot better. Also, consider running the domain check on a smaller area to find systematic domain errors that can be fixed.  Another reason why there could be large results being returned is the Search for Null Values option is checked on and you have fields that are not populated that have domains.   For our Parcel Layer issues with Domains, I am actually going to go through all 582 books, and calc the values that need calc'd like Null where they are currently '', so yep pretty stoked so far outside of size limitations, Parcel Lines with Domains Over 2 million features ran for a real short time and found 9 issues.  Thats awesome... Parcels, not sweet, but hopefully in a month with SP, and our internal fixes we can revisit these benchmarks. Are there any fixes for Anno? ... View more

The Domain check does work with tables.  Thanks on your offer for test data. Yep, I concur, I believe my initial testing was having issues due to my having to kill ArcGIS in an earlier testing scenario with FCs and Domains.  Domain checking works great on FCs, well small ones that is, but large ones not so much, hence it being killed and probably the reason I was having issues with Tables.  No Problem we got great and lots of, bad data, perfect for Reviewer, come and get some.  Dinner is served. Also, no Esri tag for this user, hmmmm. ... View more

Is there a list of Fixes for Data Reviewer, similar to what core has done for ArcGIS 10?  If so, can we see it to ascertain what is getting fixed and what is not. Is there any update to this question?  Also, I assume since this is now an ArcGIS product, IT WILL, be released the same day as SP1 Core. ... View more

Actually, it seems like It did not work, you can only have 20,000 records in the Reviewer Grid, yep, you guys definitely are pretty low here, 200K will be nice but it really should be bigger, even unlimited for File GB, and SDE. Bummer... ... View more

Going on three hours now for a calc of about 15,000 for relationship classes. One thing about Reviewer is you really start thinking, hmm, that SQL check would be good to run before that relationship class check, or that SQL Check would be good before that domain check... ... View more

I think Esri people should have a 100% say, its their forums, and I think they should get the same level of weight as the average user.  There was earlier discussion if you recall, on whether that would be the case.  Dan, you are correct in that jb is the only one that has commented, but if you look at the votes, two have voted against having a separate forum:  jscheirer and khibma.  I am referring to these two and the others that may cast a vote.  Both have been very helpful to me in release and in beta, and are also in position to respond to any of us through this new thread.  There votes mean something.  This is my reference to Esri personnel, not so much the people that went the extra step and commented.  The ones that vote have an equal say in the matter. ... View more

It is still a sample, so we should be able to extrapolate out of the sample results so far that are in, and see that roughly 75% want one, that counts for something, and there are 2 people against that are from Esri.  So, whether Esri gets a vote, either keeps as is or the 75% goes up.  Agreed, would be nice if jb would make the decision so we can all move on from this topic. ... View more

I think I may need to create a video on this issue, I am only using the main map to trigger the weird behavior in the Overview window.  The issue is still the overview window, and how the hash is rendered.  There is an inconsistency in the hash.  A video will clear this up, a lot. Here is the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb7TbxjRReU ... View more

The 10 GB storage capacity available for SQL Server 2008 R2 Express databases, also applies to Personal ArcSDE (aka. ArcSDE for SQL Server Express). That's what I wanted to hear officially.  Thanks Derek. ... View more

Yes, but this sp is tied a bit closer since there is the new legend service.  So, then next week... ... View more