Latest Contributions by HusseinNasser2

I authored an example attribute rule to demonstrate this on merge. When the user selects two line features and wants to merge, the attribute rule will pick the largest line segment and copy the addresstext of that line feature to the new merged feature and then the rule will delete the old two segments.  Hope this helps     //When merging with the option "new feature" the rule will be executed on insert, if we enabled keep original features we get access to the original rows , this way we can query the merged lines, pick the largest segment , take the address from it and copy it to the new merged line. after merging we issue a delete to delete the two original segements. var g = $feature.GlobalID var fs = contains(filter($featureset, "globalid <> @g"), geometry($feature)) var biggerAddress = null; var biggerLine = null; var tobeDeleted = [] for (var g in fs) { push(tobeDeleted, {"globalId": g.globalid} ) if (biggerLine == null){ biggerLine = g; biggerAddress = g.addresstext; } if (length(g) >= length(biggerLine)){ biggerLine = g; biggerAddress = g.addresstext; } } if (biggerLine == null) return; return { "result": {"attributes": {"addresstext": biggerAddress}}, "edit": [{ "className": "main.theline", "deletes": tobeDeleted }] }     ... View more

I'm not sure if the user workflow allows it but I would suggest using the option to keep the original features  and let the attribute rules do the delete instead of the merge tool. This gives you more control as it turns the operation from a delete , update. To an update only and you will write the rule to trigger on update on geometry (use the triggering fields to set the rule to trigger only on the shape change) on the update you will have the control to query the original features (since they won't be deleted) and copy any attribute you want off of it. And then later you can insert the logic to actually delete the original feature.     My guess as to why you are losing your update is as you suspected the order of the operations causes your update to be lost/ not persisted.      ... View more

I can't tell what is going on but let us verify few things   1) Change the server logs to debug and see if you have entries for attribute rules being evaluated.  2) Does full extent work?  3) create new features and then evaluate them do they get picked up?    if that doesn't work Finally try the following.  Delete the validation rules, delete the error tables, then add the validation rule again, this will generate the error tables. Makes sure you are using a branch version workspace when you do that. Then delete  the feature service and create new map, add your layer and the error tables and publish with the validation server, create a new feature service and test that new feature service..      ... View more

I would recommend not writing to the association table directly as it can be error prune. Instead use the provided attribute rules dictionary APIs  I authored a blog about it  https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/utility-network/electric-gas/advanced-attribute-rules-creating-utility-network-associations-with-attribute-rules   for more advanced cases use this keyword  Read more here about "^UN_Association" https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/data/geodatabases/overview/attribute-rule-dictionary-keywords.htm         ... View more

If you are looking for junction Edge associations you should use  featureSetByAssociation($feature, 'junctionEdge')    "Connected" is only for JJ associations    ... View more