Latest Contributions by ThomasColson

Sounds like a security issue: if content on the C drive get's deleted, and the OS rebooted, some critical protection file, now gone, allows hackers access to something. What about those laptops at the remote field station/fire fighters now on a 3 month detail that have 10.6? Wonder if there's a CVE #? The support life cycle of Arc and Pro, and the availability of critical patches as opposed to running around upgrading 10's or hundreds of computers RIGHT NOW when we just did it last month is weighing heavily on our decision, yet to be made, about moving to Pro. I've been down the hotfix request road before. You get the Spanish Inquisition about why it's needed "Ummmm......it deletes files off the C: Drive".  With a new version of Pro seeming to come out every 6-8-months-ish, I'm already having a hard time getting IT's attention.  It takes us 6 months to get our hands on each machine to do an Arc Upgrade.  I get that some, if not most, bugs and enhancements get punted to the next version.  Thankfully, I'm not moving to 10.6, as a matter of principal, and one most IT folks subscribe to, NEVER install the .0 version! I add to that by skipping a version: 10.1, 10.3.1, 10.5.1.....and that's an IT rule. 18 months is the minimum upgrade cycle they can support, looking at their project list for the next 3 years, that's going to turn into 24-30 months, which puts me in the very uncomfortable position of having a production deployment in mature or extended support. When you throw ArcGIS Pro Publish Services To ArcGIS Server  into the mix, and now have to patch and upgrade significantly more components, the workload gets tougher, and often, not sustainable. Imagine a "delete stuff from the OS" issue in Server or Portal, that "is fixed in the next version". Wut?!?! We just spent 12 months, 40 hours on the phone with Premium Support, and had to pay IT overtime just to get this version running! I had one in PTL where just clicking a button (in PTLADMIN) crashed the OS. Due to the security issue that presented, we just removed the functionality that we desperately needed. Security trumps functionality these days. Sorry folks, we're not supporting AD groups in PTL.  As for " existing functionality of a previous version getting broken in a new version", we can definitely apply that to Pro, but replace "broken" with "missing" and "Pro is replacing desktop", the Support Lifecycle Calendar for Arc thumb tacked behind your desk, and users whom you support not quite accepting your explanation of "Arc Catalog isn't gone, it's just different". Totally understand that all sort of previously unheard of functionality takes a while to get right, but I'd much rather see the tools I need to do my job work, and work well, before I start exploring 3D forest inventories and "Projects".  There's some kind of Urban Legend that all GIS'ers install the latest Pro or Arc Map the day it comes out, and the support life cycle dates support that. It took me a year just to get Pro to the point where I could expand acceptance testing beyond my own workstations. I do not, as a matter of principal, go to IT and have them install a version, that, come to find out, deletes stuff off the C drive. That would be the last ESRI software ever approved on the network. We've all had the TS call where the solution is "The next version fixes it", but, alas, IT is not installing the next version. This gets more complicated as we move into cloud based deployments and start to move workstations closer to the data with RDI and Citrix, and there are greater dependencies on versions and significantly longer lead times in certifying a version for deployment in a cloud solution that support 1000 users. One simply does not install 10.6 or 2.2 in a mass deployment without months of testing. If someone went through that amount of blood sweat and tears to deploy version x.x, as I suspect the OP did, expecting a hot fix for a critical issue is legit. However, in a nod to TS, I certainly wouldn't be (and don't) demanding hot fixes for every minor bug, such as "icons get deleted when you search for Jerry Garcia in Locator" (because you're looking for the Easter Egg you know exists in Pro......).  Perfect world: Major release of Pro every 2 years, on January 1. Service packs every 6 months. Hot fixes for critical issues for the previous 2 versions which don't need to be begged for. I say that tongue in cheek, because, if I have to wait 2 years for the ArcGIS Pro Publish Services To ArcGIS Server   bug to be fixed...... ... View more

I voted up, but I think the response is going to involve seeing if customizing the ribbon or quick access toolbar doesn't meet this need. Suggest exploring that, and, if not, update the idea e.g "I tried the customize ribbon but it still doesn't get me where I need (screenshot attached).  ... View more

you don't need to schema bind the underlying tables, just the view. You "could" do it with 5 joins, won't know till you find out. You could also pull a view from the view, add your select as to it, schema bind and index it. Your geometry error indicates some error condition in how you defined the joins. SQL will return the results correctly, because all that's doing is showing the contents of the geometry column(s?) in SSMS, which is Well Known Text. When you attempt to render the results of the geometry column in a client application like Arc, that's where the invalid error will show up if you've violated a condition. Start deconstructing your join, start with two tables and march thru the indexed view process till you find the table that is causing the problem. I would suggest you post your query syntax here, but on SQL Spatial, I've had more luck with Stack Overflow. If you do go to SO, make sure your post is very detailed, and you clarify the result is "An Indexed Spatial View". You'll get flamed if you're not concisely clear, rough crowd there. Keep us posted! I've done this with two tables in complicated joins, both spatial or one spatial one not. You might have to use CTE's to clean up the spatial column problem. One though, are your 5 tables all spatial? All same geom? (Point line or poly)? All same SRID? All same indexing strategy on the spatial column? Does the query execution plan show anything unusual?  ... View more

Try adding an index on that view. Create Indexed Views | Microsoft Docs  With luck, you can create it on that select as statement. I had the same (but not exact) problem when creating views so we could look at stuff in Access DB, needed a primary key, indexed views saved the day. If I remember, you need to create the view with Schema Binding, which should be possible if you're not throwing crazy left joins and unions in your view definition.  ... View more

By means of gifting, Kory would be ecstatic if you marked his answer as correct (so other folks with the same problem know it's a legit solution from ESRI), and, I experience holiday-like euphoria every time someone adds their user story and vote to https://community.esri.com/ideas/12258 . ... View more

That would be cool, great idea! ... View more

That would be cool, great idea! ... View more

There's a lot you could do with QR codes in AGOL: Scan one to download a collector map or S123......similar to how Avenza works.... ... View more

There's a lot you could do with QR codes in AGOL: Scan one to download a collector map or S123......similar to how Avenza works.... ... View more

"Archiving isn't required for offline workflows to be supported." Am I reading Take a map offline—ArcGIS Pro | ArcGIS Desktop wrong? Seems the only way to achieve that is enable archiving....if that's NOT the case (I can still "Download Map with a feature service" and edit it offline WITHOUT having to enable archiving, that solves 90% of what we're dealing with today).  However, we're not seeing the child sync hitting any version, including the child of the child, when we hit sync, or remove and sync, in Pro 2.1.2. We worked through some permission issues in SDE, but....nothing. As far as splitting the regions into their own FS's, that was (is) the plan, still seeing the "where are the edits" after sync (remember, nothing to rec and post).  "During your testing, do you see any edits making it back to your enterprise geodatabase?" No, that is where the mystery lies.  I'm working up a detailed steps to repro, and will submit a TS case tomorrow. Still convinced a)missing a check box and b)reading the wrong documentation.  Your response is incredibly helpful, I'm printing it off to take home and read....... ... View more

I get all the steps, as described, as "How it should work", but what I'm seeing is, upon sync,and sync and remove map, whatever was on the SQLite GDB is not making it to the child, or the child of the child. There's nothing to rec and post. That specific issue sounds like a TS case....stay tuned....I'm hoping other GN folks have some thoughts on this and I've missed one little itty bitty check box somewhere.  With regard to comparison to the offline editing workflow in Arc, I think the distinction is very important in terms of sys admin workload. I was very excited with Pro came out (Finally!) with the "Equivalent" to offline editing in Arc. I've put a few months into testing it, developing and documenting workflows, and have rolled the procedure out to my staff for beta testing. Now on to the next phase, do it all over on versioned Geodatabases. A particular need came up, a nationwide application where we could have up to 9 "regional" child versions of default, where we need to support offline-capable editing of a feature service connected to each one of those versions, due to poor network performance being a barrier to "live editing" of a feature service in Pro for about 75% of our customers, and, what has a slight chance to shake out as a requirement to support the same on collector, for say 10%. So tuning on Archiving is the only way we can support that offline-capable-feature service requirement, unlike Arc, which doesn't require archiving to support offline. I may be reading your response wrong? But my interpretation is, we're going to have to rec and post, on average, 50 (extreme top end if every single customer actually edits these data) child-child versions for each regional version (450 potential)? This gets better when that process is repeated, so let's say 20% of our customers want to do an offline edit workflow every 3 months. This is where the comparison to Arc comes in, again, I may be wrong, but with "Create Local Copy for editing" I don't recall having to rec and post each individual check out to a child of default, or default. Consider I'm no expert at versioning and avoid it whenever possible if the data steward needs don't require it. I get how and why archiving is needed to get that offline capability with Pro, and I'm a big fan of offline working starting at 2.1, but having to put hands on that many children is.....not workflow I can support, nor is locking folks into "live editing" when it takes all day to download a single windows update.  ... View more

Same behavior if I just pull it off of default. Children of the default, when I sync and remove the map, the map reverts to default. Rec and post works, but the child versions fails to delete. But it gets better......I said the rec and post GP tool worked. What also worked well, was....everything was deleted from both versions!  weird what appear to be null geometry issues...(original points are in the base table, whatever was in the child version that got rec and posted is not there....).  ... View more

So it turns out archiving and not moving edits to base is the only way to go Enabling archiving—ArcGIS Help | ArcGIS Desktop  so you're stuck with all of those "child of the child" versions. Head scratcher for sure.  ... View more

I posted it in the Early Adopter forum under Geoprocessing, as that's the only version I happen to have available at the moment.....put it there 'cuz I went all Steven Spielberg and included a movie showing the workflow and the result. ... View more

I am getting the hang and CPU cooling fan wanting to helicopter out of my laptop on pressing "Run" as well, in 2.1.2. Where I was going with that was Validate and Run result in the same behavior.  ... View more