Latest Contributions by Robert_LeClair

This behavior is almost always because the trace is still reading the old network-attribute value stored in the network topology, meaning the edit didn’t get fully incorporated by validation. Try these checks: 1. Validate the full dirty area (not just current extent)- A feature isn’t guaranteed valid “until the full extent of the feature’s dirty area is validated.” If you validate by extent and don’t fully cover the dirty area, tracing can still use outdated attribute values. 2. Confirm a dirty area is created for the attribute change - Network attributes used by tracing are stored in the topology; when the source field changes, a dirty area should be created and then validation updates the stored value used by traces. 3. If this is a Utility Network tier/subnetwork workflow - Depending on tier configuration, validation may mark subnetworks dirty and you may need follow-on QC (for example, Update Subnetwork / evaluate rules) for analytics to fully reflect changes. 4. Barrier value: code vs description - Make sure the barrier is evaluating the stored numeric value (0/1) and not a coded-value description string (“Open/Closed”). ... View more

@DougBrowning - excellent!  I'm glad it worked out...after 6-8 months of the mini UI boxes!  All the best! ... View more

At the top left of the Elements Pane, you should see the words Map Grid with a dropdown arrow, click the dropdown arrow and select Interior Labels.  This opens the Appearance for the labels.  You can then expand Halo, set a Halo symbol, Color, Outline color, Outline width and Halo Size.  This may accomplish what you're looking to do. ... View more

Likely your numeric field type is Float and is expected behavior for float storage.  One option is to the change the display formatting by opening the Fields Designer for the layer.  In the Fields Designer, locate the Number Format column and double click that cell for the attribute field.  Then click the 3 dots to open the Number Format pane.  Change the Rounding for decimal places to 1 and then click OK.  This should remove the "subatomic" number format. ... View more

“Register existing data” is not done by importing the replica XML. It’s a Create Replica option. Try these steps: 1.  Pre-stage the data on the child (your target geodatabase) using a copy/paste or similiar workflow GP tool. Key requirement: the datasets on the child must already exist and match the parent (same names and schema/properties). Pro doc also notes GlobalIDs must exist before copying. 2.  In ArcGIS Pro, run Create Replica (Distributed Geodatabase toolset) and check Register existing data only. You must be connected to the child geodatabase as the data owner, and the child must contain the replica datasets. About your “Invalid data” when using Import XML schema:  The XML created/used for replica/disconnected workflows must be an ArcGIS-generated XML workspace document (created by Create Replica with Output Type = Xml file) and is imported with the replica/disconnected workflow (“Import data and schema”) I'd recommend reading the Help documentation Create a replica in a disconnected environment | ArcGIS Pro documentation to fully understand the process. ... View more

You can use Insert->Dynamic Text->Service Layer Credits and place it anywhere you want and style any way you wish.  You can read and see more about it here - Remove Service Layer Credits ArcPro ... View more

Although I don't have an answer for this question, it was discussed with geodatabases about 2 years ago in this thread.  If there are orphaned locks in place, then you can use the Compact geoprocessing tool to delete LOCK files. ... View more

EHSA does not apply extra “weight” to 99% vs 90% when it assigns the pattern categories (New/Consecutive/Persistent/Sporadic/etc.). For the pattern logic, each time step is effectively treated as hot / cold / not significant based on the Gi_Bin significance classification (after FDR, if you enabled it). The strength (90 vs 95 vs 99) affects whether a bin is considered significant, but once it is significant, the temporal pattern rules don’t further differentiate 90% from 99% for category assignment. So in your examples: A: …, H(90), H(90), H(90) B: …, H(99), H(99), H(99) If both meet the definition of Consecutive Hot Spot (final time step is a hot spot and there’s an uninterrupted run of hot spots at the end, with the run not long enough to be “persistent”), then EHSA will categorize them the same. The 99% sequence doesn’t get special priority for being “more confident,” aside from being less likely to flip to not significant. The “fuzzy weighting between 90/95/99” concept exists in a different tool: Hot Spot Analysis Comparison, which explicitly provides options like Combine 90/95/99 significant, Exact matching, etc., and documents the similarity weighting approach. EHSA’s pattern categories are not based on those similarity weights. ... View more

If you check the "Change missing values to NoData" box, does the "extra" class disappear?  If any values fall outside your defined ranges (for example, min/max slightly beyond what you assumed, or gaps between ranges), they can be written out as their original values, creating an extra output value (“6th class”). ... View more

VirtualRepository.CreateClone is an internal ArcGIS Pro operation you can see in Diagnostic Monitor when Pro is cloning (copying) the layout/map state into a temporary “virtual” workspace to render/export (for example, to isolate each map series page/export so it can draw consistently). It isn’t a layer/service call itself—more like Pro preparing an internal export “snapshot.” When it suddenly becomes very slow, it’s usually because something in that export snapshot is expensive to resolve (commonly complex symbology, lots of vector content, or raster content), or you’ve hit a version-specific performance issue. There was BUG-000167349 for ArcGIS Pro that was found in 3.2.2 but fixed at 3.6 and 3.5.8 versions. You could try a flattened PDF export to see if that reduces the processing time. ... View more