Latest Contributions by TedCronin

I'm not an SDE admin, so I use MakeQueryTable quite a bit for various things (mainly querying/reporting our overly complex timber sale/activities tracking system). Even without pre-indexing my fields (pre-indexing join fields and query fields would probably be a good idea), performance is exceptional in a local FGDB. The trick then is to then save the feature layer out as a .lyr file (which stores the SQL internally). Of course, all tables need to be in the same FGDB, SDE, or PGDB, otherwise the tool doesn't work. Like Ted said: A sort of non-SDE spatial view. It's very powerful. This sample takes 1 second to return a featurelayer query composed of three related tables (600, 70000, and 50000 records respectively): queryExp = "question_3_fma_summary.RMU_ID = rmu_polyid.RMU_ID AND rmu_polyid.RMU_POLYID = rmus_we_care_about.RMU_POLYID AND\     rmus_we_care_about.MM_POL_LBL in ('reclass-released','reclass-released-may-be-available') AND question_3_fma_summary.COMPSOLD_DATE >= 20030418" gp.MakeQueryTable_management(question3FmaSummaryTbl + ";" + rmuPolyIdTbl + ";" + rmusWeCareAboutFC, featureLayerFL, "ADD_VIRTUAL_KEY_FIELD", "", "", queryExp); showGpMessage() I want to try what you are doing here Chris, because this looks pretty cool.  My thinking, I am tired of having to use sde command line.  Its SO old.  Its everything against what I believe in with technology, so perhaps Esri can just optimize these tools, so we can throw huge datasets in the mix and get great perf. @Chris have you played with Mapping with the same lyr files generated from the Make Query Tool, or have you tried to create an MSD file using these lyr files, then serving them up on Server? @Rich, yep, I will be stopping by, lots to catch up on. ... View more

I think that a forum called "other" won't attract as many posts as one called "general", as someone else mentioned a while ago. If the searching/keywords/tags could be fixed to make posts a lot easier to find, I would be all for it, I just don't see that happening 🙂 I agree. And its not happening fast enough.  Nice to have a tag cloud, and one separate forum for python does make sense.  To have a python forum, you really could rename perhaps the Cartography forum, or others where people may accidentally post py related issues.  I agree with Jesusa in that there are some forums that are being underutilized.  Chris is right in the sense where all of these forums that have less than 25, and there are quite a few, could be joined together to streamline the page a bit more.  Python has the potential to just have a lot of topics that may need get covered in its own category.  There are so many uses that you have given us at 10, that it would be nice to have the capability to just have access to the 1 python forum.  People can post server related issues, desktop, other modules and packages that people are using to get their job done, table/field scripting, and I got to think there will be more good stuff at 10.1  Then we get into all the different toolboxes, there is just the potential to have alot of diverse posts about python, which why I am thinking, a python category makes sense. Oh and Jim, BDFL is a good thing 🙂 At least with python. ... View more

Thank you Kumar. Not a big issue, just good to know you were able to repro. ... View more

Thank you Richard. Yep, I agree, I have everything else all scripted, so it works as expected.  I too, have a script that takes different views to fc as well for use on the web, since the views don't quite perform as I would want on the web.  The views are mainly for desktop type analysis. So, when are you coming back in to the office. ... View more

Makes Sense to me Goh_Raj, in that More posts = More activity. More activity = More people reading the threads And then they'd think that if more people are reading a specific forum = Most likely that someone will answer their questions, I even imagine that for a treat = Bart would switch sides as well. ... View more

Your welcome Kumar.  Happy to help.  Should have done a bit more testing at beta, but there was a lot coming out, so my priorities may have been a bit off.  Perhaps by SP2, cross my fingers 🙂 ... View more

Please confirm the following: 1. What is the version and build no. of all the ArcGIS Desktop and PLTS you are using? 2. What type of data you are working with, is it SDE/File/Personal Geodatabase? 3. Which checks are you running? 4. Are you running Batch Jobs or individual checks? 1.  ArcGIS 10 Desktop Build 2414.  Not Sure of the build number for Reviewer (but the was that was released for 10). 2.  Using File GB for Reviewer. 3.  Default Checks I am using are below: The checks where I have seen this behavior are marked with *: Invalid Geometry *MultiLine MultiPoly *PolyLine of Path Self Intersect 4.  I am running individual Checks on 6 different layers: Parcel Ref (Lines 235,997 Features) Parcel Lines (Lines over 2 Million Features) Parcel Poly (Poly over 700,000 Features) Mineral Rights (Poly 226 Features) Condos (Poly and Subtype 33,023 Features) AOI (Book and Page) (Poly over 23,000 Features) So, far, I have been unable to run a Full database Check for Parcel Lines, and Have done it only once for Parcels. ... View more

When is the enhancement going to get implemented in Reviewer, perhaps 10.1. Thank you for the workaround idea, will have to play with that a bit. ... View more