|
POST
|
If you check the server logs you should be able to see some warnings or an error that gives you more detail as to what is going wrong.
... View more
01-08-2026
11:02 AM
|
0
|
0
|
771
|
|
POST
|
If you want something to be a subnetwork controller, it has to be a device with a terminal configuration (partitioned domains require a directional terminal configuration, hierarchical allows directional or bi-directional). Meters are typically modelled as devices and not junctions. Junctions in a sewer network are typically just fittings and misc pipe connections. Anything that is tracking or modifying flow (including the channels in manholes) are typically modelled as devices.
... View more
01-08-2026
10:23 AM
|
1
|
1
|
2251
|
|
POST
|
As long as the field isn't associated with a network attribute or something required by the utility network, you can do this the same way you'd alter any other field in a geodatabase. The Design view for fields or the Alter field tool. Edit: @VishApte_NGIS mentions below that if you just switch a field from lower case to upper case, it will not change the field. This means you must alter the fields(s) twice, once to make it upper chase (with an extra adornment like 1) and a second time to remove the adornment. To make this easier, consider using the Alter Fields (multiple) tool to make the two calls.
... View more
01-08-2026
10:17 AM
|
2
|
0
|
758
|
|
POST
|
If you haven't already, please log a case with support on this. What are the pooling settings on the service you're using to edit the utility network? Here's an example of the default settings, which should probably be increased when the service is being used in a production capacity.
... View more
01-08-2026
10:15 AM
|
0
|
1
|
774
|
|
POST
|
Hmm, I don't see any great options for this other than what you're doing. The best idea I could come up with would be to assign a network category to let this be treated as a barrier on your pressure tier, but not on your system tier. This handles the inconsistent subnetwork name problem but means that your isolation trace will treat this like a closed valve if you do your isolation trace on your pressure tier. You could get the correct result if you ran your isolation trace against the system tier, but that will be slower than running a trace on your system tier since it must analyze more features and paths to sources (identifying all the possible paths to water sources, instead of just to the pressure controllers).
... View more
01-08-2026
08:09 AM
|
1
|
0
|
489
|
|
POST
|
@PierreloupDucroix you are correct in that the behavior is slightly different when posting edits from a version. If the subnetwork or subnetwork line is modified in the version we will mark it as dirty when it gets posted because we know that there are changes that happened to it in the version that mean it needs to be processed in default. As an example, if you create new features in your version and run update subnetwork, they will have their subnetwork name populated and the subnetwork line will be updated to reflect the new features in your version. After you reconcile and post your version to default, there is no guarantee that those same features will be connected, so we make you rerun update subnetwork to ensure everything is clean and connected.
... View more
01-08-2026
06:01 AM
|
1
|
2
|
961
|
|
POST
|
Well, that rules out the obvious problems. If you haven't already, I suggest logging a case with support. Does it only fail when you include all three features? Or can you narrow it down to just one of those features in the template?
... View more
01-08-2026
05:55 AM
|
0
|
0
|
582
|
|
POST
|
You can do this in the Field Design View to change them in the geodatabase, then any time you add that feature class to a map it will use the field alias. If you need to change MANY field aliases or domain descriptions, you could consider using the D_Rename table. If you have pre-existing maps, this change will not automatically apply to the layers in those maps. Instead you must manually alter the Field Alias on each feature/subtype layer, as well as any popups that have overwriten the default alias of the field. Something like the utility network properties extractor can make this process easier because it allows you to export properties to a file, adjust them, then re-import them. You can also use the Paste Properties command on a layer to paste the field properties between an already configured map and an existing map. Because of this it is best to get your field aliases figured out in your data model and initial map before you start making too many additional maps.
... View more
01-07-2026
09:46 AM
|
0
|
0
|
374
|
|
POST
|
This thread was created from a comment on this article: https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-utility-network-blog/modeling-related-data-in-a-utility-network/ba-p/1675555 I have clarified the article to explicitly state that the related records are non-network features/rows. I haven't seen any examples of moving all the business attributes into related tables, but maybe someone in the community can speak to what their experience has been with it? What I more commonly see is customers who had heavily a heavily de-normalized data model restructure their data model to move fields for things like customer data, inspection data, etc into related tables. Wide tables and many relationship classes both carry their own performance costs, so be considerate with how you store and manage your data. This is a principle that doesn't apply to GIS, but any application that is built on a relational database.
... View more
01-07-2026
05:17 AM
|
0
|
0
|
384
|
|
POST
|
@Andy_Morgan if every feature needs to be assigned to a single zone/partition, then the batch trace example can do that. Its getting a little late to change your approach now, but if you're going to be at the Developer's Summit in Palm Springs this year I can show you (or you can watch the demo theatre presentation I'm doing on the community sample).
... View more
01-07-2026
04:59 AM
|
0
|
1
|
955
|
|
POST
|
Disabling and re-enabling the network topology on a regular basis is going to have some long-term performance implications, and you shouldn't need to do that. I'd make sure that going forward, you're just always logged into portal, and if you run into any strange behavior, make sure you're logged into the right portal/service, restart Pro, and hopefully that fixes it. If you find the experience of editing using the web map from Portal acceptable, then that's fine. There's a lot more you can do with a desktop map in ArcGIS Pro than you can do with a Web Map in Map Viewer, but you aren't relying on any of those capabilities so you're fine (display filters, layers with multiple definition queries, etc).
... View more
01-06-2026
09:03 AM
|
1
|
0
|
886
|
|
POST
|
Do you have any constraints configured on the junction or device layer that could be causing the failure? Can you successfully draw the couplings and EFV outside of a group template?
... View more
01-06-2026
07:09 AM
|
0
|
1
|
684
|
|
POST
|
1 - I assume you're synchronizing customer data to this table? We recommend that you avoid any kind of operation that would require you to completely truncate and reload network data. We usually see customers putting the link to the customer data in the network, but storing the customer details (which shouldn't be editable in the GIS) in separate, un-versioned tables that can be freely modified/truncated by an external process. 2 - The system only lets you run truncate table on simple features. Because this table has a controller dataset (the utility network) it is not considered simple. 3 - I was surprised to see we let you unregister the table as versioned, this puts the system in an inconsistent state. That is to say that the system tables may still contain historical or versioned data for this table, even though the table itself has removed that information.
... View more
01-05-2026
08:53 AM
|
0
|
1
|
762
|
|
POST
|
1) Can you briefly explain why you want to do this? Since there may be a better approach or concerns with this approach, depending on your situation. 2) Do any of these feature classes have geodatabase relationships?
... View more
01-05-2026
05:11 AM
|
0
|
3
|
799
|
|
POST
|
@EdwardBlair you'll want to migration the feature linked annotation class to use global ids.
... View more
01-05-2026
04:47 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1153
|
| Title | Kudos | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | yesterday | |
| 1 | yesterday | |
| 1 | Thursday | |
| 1 | 2 weeks ago | |
| 1 | 2 weeks ago |
| Online Status |
Online
|
| Date Last Visited |
16 hours ago
|