|
POST
|
Since you mentioned the database / objects were not created as an (enterprise) geodatabase, I am guessing the ESRI documentation here is not so relevant. https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/data/geodatabases/manage-postgresql/restore-geodatabase-postgresql.htm In the case of EGDB's, the restore process has a few specific steps/orders that must be taken. But since your data is not in an EGDB, I don't know if any of that is relevant, especially since you are showing normal behavior in QGIS.
... View more
08-07-2025
05:23 AM
|
0
|
0
|
677
|
|
POST
|
Not sure if this is relevant, but are you able to connect to the db as the original schema owner (i.e. using the same user name as schema, not the 'owner' that is potentially different than the schema name) and does it behave the same as the user/role you are trying to grant permissions to? Did you restore the schema and objects under a different schema name, possibly done by editing the logical backup's SQL commands if you used pg_dump for backup?
... View more
08-06-2025
01:52 PM
|
0
|
2
|
738
|
|
IDEA
|
@WendyHarrison Thank you, that is exactly the kind of basic information we were looking for! It wasn't apparent to me that this rule is the only thing preventing/allowing crossed leader lines, as place overlapping option overrides other proximity issues in addition to leader lines. The documentation you linked doesn't mention callout/leader lines but now it makes more sense to me. That would be great to have this issue added to documentation as well. Given that info, I wonder if we ought to create a new idea that increases the granularity of these rules regarding 'forced label drawing' beyond this one monolithic option. I wonder if there could be sub-options that, for example, do not allow crossing leader lines in particular while still forcing all labels to draw. This probably means such an option would have to make exceptions or trade-offs, that maybe the user could provide weights for these exceptions. For example, make offset value exceptions (more or greater than what is defined in preferred/maximum offset), or 'External Zones' exceptions to force placement of callouts in different angles around a feature beyond what the user specifies. Things like that would be great to have to dial in callout labels a bit further.
... View more
08-06-2025
01:28 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1035
|
|
POST
|
Hi Robert, this idea was closed by an ESRI member in 2021 but it seems the line-crossing behavior is still experienced by many that are repsonding in that thread. Is there a way to re-open this idea so we can give it kudos and bump up the issue? It would be nice if we each did not have to send support a ticket, which is not communicated back to others, and instead someone from ESRI could respond there with a conclusion about if this is an ongoing bug, or if this is not actually functional as intended, or if it was never was actually implemented, etc?
... View more
08-05-2025
11:31 AM
|
0
|
1
|
561
|
|
IDEA
|
My leader lines have always crossed on every ArcGIS Pro version I've used since 2.x up to 3.2.x now. I never knew the intended behavior was to prevent crossing. I've always had to convert to anno/graphics and go manual if I wanted complex leader-line/callout labeling to look decent for production.
... View more
08-05-2025
11:25 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1094
|
|
POST
|
This is the case for my Lenovo P1 Gen 7 laptop with Ada 2000 GPU. Nvidia doesn't even offer drivers for it from the nvidia driver lookup page. Edit: maybe I'm wrong
... View more
07-31-2025
07:08 AM
|
0
|
0
|
2037
|
|
IDEA
|
I find it frustrating to hear conflicting guidance regarding certs for core components from ESRI. I have an issue where my ArcGIS hosting Server will not register with ArcGIS Monitor, while all other Enterprise components set up in the exact same manner (OS, network-wise) have no issue. After exhausting all other troubleshooting we could think of, ESRI support suggested all Enterprise components must have CA-signed backend certs. Some of these cert updates can be automated via API or command line, but not all, and the methods are not consistent across the Enterprise components. We can use automated cert update solutions like LetsEncrypt and Certify the Web, but it seems like ESRI could make the steps of actually applying these certs a lot easier for Enterprise administrators.
... View more
07-30-2025
05:32 AM
|
0
|
0
|
3673
|
|
POST
|
If you use Survey123 connect, you can specify in the XLSform that the survey should include the built-in survey "start" and "end" types, i.e. when the user opened the form as start, and when they hit the 'submit' button as the end. These are in UTC epoch millisecond time like the other AGOL date fields. You can 'name' these fields to be whatever attribute name you want them to be in the hosted feature layer; these are different from CreationDate although often the survey end datetime should be basically the same as the CreationDate time. They are hidden by default and do not show up to the form users. However, these dates will be included in the output of the Survey123 webhook attributes if you use them.
... View more
07-28-2025
07:30 AM
|
0
|
0
|
460
|
|
POST
|
Actually I wonder if I should pg_dump attachment data in an uncompressed dump format, so that our offsite server can de-dupe nearly all of the attachment data, assuming each image BLOB can be read as identical blocks... but that would still require a lot of gigabytes of backup transfer if they are backed up multiple times a day since de-duping happens after transfer to our offsite server, rather than before. In the grand scheme of things, though, I believe we are transferring TB's of backup data multiple times each day from our various databases for our organization. The GIS portion of the backup data may just be a drop in the bucket, relatively. Even so, if I have the ability to lighten that load then it's probably a good practice, as I assume this load will only increase with time.
... View more
07-28-2025
06:36 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1217
|
|
POST
|
I am new to PostgreSQL. I am migrating our production GIS data from SQL Server to Postgres. I have completed all of the testing I can think of to ensure our migrated data will perform exactly the same. Everything looks good. I am now at the step of ensuring I have a solid backup strategy in place before doing the 'true' migration of all our data and republishing all the things, etc. Our standard backup policy is to keep 2 days of SQL Server database backups locally (number of backups per day depends on the database in question), but we keep 90 days of backups offsite, and actually that is even duplicated to another offsite backup location as well. These offsite backup locations do de-duplication of data, but de-duping will not work on compressed data as far as I understand. My enterprise geodatabases contain many GB of feature class attachment data (mostly images), that are important, but I am thinking of backing up the attachment data on a separate schedule from the other data. My current backup strategy is to pg_dump my egdb database(s) to a directory format (compressed by default), so that I can pg_restore using the necessary steps/order of operation properly for edgb restoration. My testing so far shows that this process works correctly, and certain egdb functionality/ownership is broken when these steps are not followed. Anyway, I am thinking of having two separate pg_dump schedules, one that does not include attachment data and one that only includes attachment data. For 'no attachment' backup, this uses the pg_dump argument --exclude-table-data=*.*__attach* Since all attachment tables include "__attach" (leading double-underscore), this seems like a safe way to filter out the data from any attachment tables owned by any schema in the database. This includes the attachment tables themselves, which I assume is important to preserve the table relationships, but does not include table data. My testing so far shows this works correctly; the *__attach* tables exist, but have no records. On the other side, the backup that only includes attachment tables + data uses the argument -t *.*__attach* -a Where -t specifies only tables matching this pattern should be dumped. Additionally, -a specifies that only data from these tables should be exported. This also seems to work as expected; pg_restore recognizes this as a data-only dump and does not indicate errors where the tables already exist in the database; it just loads the data. Does anyone have experience with something like this, and know of any concerns for using this kind of strategy? Since my attachment data changes much less frequently than my GIS data, I figure a potential loss of a handful of images from a database failure is worth the overhead of doing full backups of 10's of GB of data for every dump (likely twice four times a day), compared to some hundreds of MB of GIS data for each dump. I'm not sure what the actual size is so I'm just ballparking.
... View more
07-27-2025
10:18 AM
|
0
|
1
|
1282
|
|
POST
|
Do we know if this affects all versions of SQL Server? And only SQL Server and not other db’s like postgres?
... View more
07-26-2025
07:20 AM
|
0
|
1
|
1416
|
|
POST
|
Can you describe that license check bug? I haven’t heard of that one yet.
... View more
07-26-2025
07:10 AM
|
0
|
1
|
1049
|
|
POST
|
So are you saying that you are certain the ${numberofviolationnotes} variable is a field in a feature class that is populated/calculated by a Survey123 form? Do you have access to the Survey123 design? Do you know if it was made using Survey123 Connect, or just the standard AGOL Survey123 design tools?
... View more
07-24-2025
11:52 AM
|
0
|
0
|
649
|
|
POST
|
Hm interesting, I've had the opposite experience -- I've only started using Power Automate ArcGIS connectors a few months ago, and I have had enough issues with the ArcGIS connectors that it was the weakest link in my whole solution and caused me anxiety and time spent tracking down fails and (re)processing things. It thankfully did force me to increase my error handling strategy. But it's been 2-3 weeks since my rewrite without the ArcGIS connectors for querying/updating features, and so far none have failed whereas I would have experienced something on the order of 10-20 fails in the same time period before.
... View more
07-24-2025
11:36 AM
|
0
|
1
|
1909
|
| Title | Kudos | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 03-28-2026 08:15 PM | |
| 1 | 03-08-2026 12:16 PM | |
| 1 | 07-22-2025 07:31 AM | |
| 1 | 12-02-2025 03:04 PM | |
| 1 | 11-19-2025 05:45 AM |
| Online Status |
Offline
|
| Date Last Visited |
Sunday
|