Latest Contributions by MalcolmMeyer2

Great, this is the type of information that is helpful. Especially this - might have to look into this for our use case: The network shares are flagged read only for all authorized users with the exception of two users that have full access for editing.  This prevents lock files from being created on the fGDB files by users only accessing to read the data. ... View more

That's fine, but doesn't really get to my question. I have a hunch that an Access database would be more reliable on a windows network share than an Esri File Geodatabase, because 1000x more people use MS Access than ArcGIS, therefore more testing, more bugs, etc., but that's just a hunch. I am posting this to get real-world experience using GIS data on network shares outside of an Enterprise Geodatabase. ... View more

Another clarification - I am wondering about shapefile vs FGDB vs PGDB in terms of their reliability and stability when used over a network share with multiple viewers and one editor. I realize this is not a true enterprise setup, but I inherited hundreds of shapefiles that are referenced via a network share. I do not want to convert all these to an Enterprise GDB (once we get this up and running) if I can avoid it.  ... View more

As I noted above, this is not recommended by Esri via Esri support -  You can share a fGDB between multiple users, however, there really can and should only be one editor per feature class at any one time. This is my current setup and is leading to data corruption. I am switching to SQL Server Express and will test that out, but that conversion is up to IT and is some unknown time in the future. ... View more

For clarification, the current workflow only involves one editor and two viewers. Even with only one editor data corruption is occurring, likely due to internal network issues which are beyond my control. I did not think this was possible, but I think you're right on here -  If you are mid edit or a GP is running and there's a significant network lag/spike issue or temporarily drops then I could see how this situation could cause orphaned processes that create issues or corruption ... View more

I was not given a reference anywhere, but I can for sure tell you that problems are occurring with using File Geodatabases from our file server, with two viewers and one editor. It would be nice if they came out and acknowledged that this setup is not recommended, not that it will not work in some cases, but that depending on the local network setup issues can arise, even with a small number of users. I would also argue that this statement -  Concurrent use of any specific file eventually degrades for large numbers of readers is too vague, and should read more like "concurrent use of data stored in File Geodatabases can lead to data corruption and loss when accessed by readers and simultaneously edited by another user" or something like that. What does "degrade" even mean if not data corruption? Maybe that access will be slow? Clarification would be helpful here. Previously we used shapefiles, which create a lock in order to, among other things, prevent data corruption. We did not have any data corruption issues when we used shapefiles. In all cases, regardless of the setup, having more than one user accessing a feature class does create a schema lock which will not allow an editor or viewer to add or delete fields.  ... View more

Just received this message from Esri Support -  File geodatabases are not recommended to be stored on network drives, and two or more users simultaneously viewing/editing a feature class within the database can easily create a wide range of issues...I would suggest that you copy the file geodatabase onto a local drive on your machine, or onto a SQL Server express database... In my case we have two viewers and one editor (myself), and I was getting very strange behavior such as randomly deleted features when other features were deleted or changed.  ... View more

Is your aim to push edits back to your workgroup geodatabase? What RDBMS system are using with your workgroup geodatabase (e.g SQL, Postgre, Oracle etc.)? - Yes, I want to register the Workgroup Geodatabase with Server and use this in Collector directly, which is what I think you are saying is possible.   If you want to push edits back to your workgroup geodatabase you would have to registered it as a data source with ArcGIS Server. You could then publish a registered feature service to Portal. Any edits made to the feature service would be applied to the workgroup geodatabase.   I've provided a link to data requirements for Collector and publishing a feature service with a workgroup geodatabase below: I have looked at these and they did not fully answer my question which is why I am asking here, though I think now I understand...   Collector for ArcGIS - What are the requirements?   ArcGIS Server - Prepare data to publish a feature service   The limit for 10 simultaneous connections may be your biggest hurdle. For example a registered feature service with a minimum instance of 1 would require an active connection to the database. So you might hit this limit pretty quickly. Maybe, I have a small field crew, but again this is why I want to use views, but alas...   To my knowledge views are restricted to a hosted feature services, both in Portal and ArcGIS Online. Again the data would be hosted in ArcGIS Online or Portal. I don't believe it's possible to create a view from a registered feature service. - So if I want to have a non-editable version of my data I have to create another version/copy? So here is my complex setup for what I want to do considering the above, anyone let me know if I'm way off here: If I want to be able to edit the same data in Collector and on the Desktop, while at the same time have a read-only version of the same data on a web map (with auto updates), I could use PostgreSQL/PostGIS as my backend database, serve my views with Koop or some other server that talks directly to Postgres, and use ArcGIS Enterprise Standard for the Collector/Desktop integration. ... View more

I think that answers it. Random I/O is key. I will share with our IT and go from there. I'll report back if I have any updates. ... View more

I am getting around 115 MB/s read and 24 MB/s write with the default test in CrystalDiskMark. The write speeds are the bottleneck in our network for sure. I recall seeing a 100 MB/s read/write recommendation for GIS use at one point either on a forum or blog, but have not been able to find it again. If there was an Esri minimum requirement that I could show to my IT team that would be very helpful, albeit this would be subject to a wide variety of contingencies depending on the types of edits as you noted above. In my situation there are three people reading data and one person editing data.  I have a hunch that I would get better write speeds using PostgreSQL on a VPS in the cloud. That is the route I am likely to go at this point, at least for testing, and if it proves successful it means either dropping Arc for editing or fork over 20k for Enterprise : (. ... View more

So how do you find the performance of editing FGDB over the network? Is there any difference in performance over the network with Pro and Desktop? Finally, do you know your read/write speed to the network drive? ... View more

I have a GB connection to my local network Windows Server which is in my same building, and in ArcMap 10.6 & now 10.7 FGDB editing over the network is very slow and buggy. Just had some data 'disappear'. My IT team wants to know if there is a minimum or recommended network read/write speed for using file geodatabases over a networked connection or mapped drive. Also, is this even a recommended practice - using a networked drive for GIS data stored in File Geodatabases but outside of a relational/Enterprise database? ... View more