Latest Contributions by EricAnderson17

Thank you Joe, I have logged this under the following enhancement. If you'd like to be attached to it so you can track its status at anytime from My Esri, please go ahead and submit a Support case referencing the ENH number: ENH-000124149: Allow locators built with the Create Locator tool and a Point Address role to return candidates and suggestions for subaddresses when the base address is inputted Best, Eric ... View more

Hi Joe, I'd be happy to get something like this logged. I tested with the Create Address Locator tool (US Address - Single House Subaddress style) and can confirm that just searching for the base address will return subaddress candidates as well: Therefore, I can definitely see about getting something logged so the new Create Locator tool functionality is more in line with the older Create Address Locator tool.  Of course I'd recommend you post something on our ArcGIS Ideas page as well, so others can view it and promote it. If you decide to do this, please let me know so I can link it with our internal enhancement. Best regards, Eric ... View more

Hi Joe, You will need to include a unit type (#, Apt, Suite, Bldg) before the actual unit value in order to return a successful subaddress candidate in the Locate pane. If a unit type is not included, the subaddress will not be returned as a candidate. From my experience, these unit types are somewhat interchangeable and if in your reference data the unit type was designated as "Suite", you would still be able to return a candidate with "#", and vise versa.  The issue reported by Bryan in the other post (no subaddress candidate returned) was still reproduced even when a unit type was included with the input address when the reference data was sourced from an enterprise geodatabase. We were unable to reproduce this when sourced from a file geodatabase, but again, as long as a unit type was included with the unit value (e.g. 606 Main St #100).  Hope this helps! Eric ... View more

Hi Bryan, To follow up, I tested the same feature class I used successfully in a file geodatabase and moved it to an Oracle 12.2 (12C) geodatabase and can reproduce the issue you are reporting. Searching for "606 MAIN ST #100" only returns a candidate for "606 MAIN ST".  Let's continue to work through your Support case and hopefully get something logged for this if the analyst working with you can reproduce the issue as well. -Eric ... View more

Hi Bryan, The issue you are describing definitely sounds like a defect. I'll do some testing this morning and see if I can reproduce the issue if I use reference data that is sourced from an Oracle geodatabase.  Thank you for bringing this up! Eric ... View more

Hi Joe, That's correct, the Repair Geometry and Check Geometry tools do not work on enterprise geodatabases. You would only need to script the Repair Geometry tool (Check Geometry just outputs a stand-alone table with any warnings/errors), but be cautious because the Repair Geometry modifies your existing data, so it may be good to script in a back-up of the data as well.  Happy Pioneer Day! -Eric ... View more

Suggestions for a local, file-based, locator will only be available for those created with the Create Locator tool (enabled by default). The Create Address Locator tool does not support suggestions for a local, file-based locator, and only supports suggestions when shared as a service. So you could test sharing the locator you created with the Create Address Locator tool to Portal, then bring in the geocode service (not the local locator) to ArcGIS Pro and test the suggestion functionality there. I do understand the point you are making though Bryan, searching for "606 Main St" does not yield any candidates with unit numbers, and you would need to actually include the unit number in the search, e.g. "606 Main St #100". I thought the issue was that you were searching for the address with the unit number and still not returning any results.  I cannot say for certain that what we are seeing here is expected behavior, but I see the same on my end. Bryan - I'd recommend we work through your Support case to maybe see if we can get an enhancement logged to provide similar functionality to what you're seeing with the Create Address Locator tool with the Create Locator tool (ability to search for the base address and see all associated subaddresses as well). I'll track down your case and work with the analyst to see if we can get something like this logged.  Best regards, Eric ... View more

Got it, thank you for the clarification Michael!  To skip ahead, the issue you are reporting about the Details pane/pop-up not showing all the records that were picked up by the Check Geometry tool (but all of them are present in the output table), definitely seems like a usability issue to me. Would you be able to work with our Support team to look into this further? I'll talk a bit offline with some members of our Geocoding team to see how we can improve the null geometry issue. I would argue that I would rather have the Create Locator tool error out than produce a locator that could potentially have issues down the road if some records had null geometry, but maybe the error messaging could be improved since this was a pain point for both you and Joe. Cheers, Eric ... View more

Hi Michael, I think I'm a little confused by your use of the word "unmatched". Are we talking about records that are coming back as unmatched when going to batch geocode with the locator? The error Joe was getting was during the locator creation (Create Locator tool), and thus he was never actually able to use the locator to perform batch geocoding.  I agree that there might be some room for improvement here, if the Create Address Locator tool allows for the locator to be created successfully even with null geometry, while the Create Locator tool does not. This is something I can test on my end, but do you know what happens when you attempt to search for one of those records that had null geometry with the locator outputted from the Create Address Locator tool?  Best regards, Eric ... View more

My pleasure Bryan. Based on the screenshots, it looks like your reference data is structured correctly and you are setting up the locator field mapping correctly as well. I agree that maybe testing outside of Oracle (in a local file geodatabase) would be a good next test. If you'd like to send me a copy of the data to help take a look at, I'd be happy to do so. My email is eanderson@esri.com. Otherwise, I recommend reaching out to Esri Support so we can investigate this a bit more thoroughly.  Best regards, Eric ... View more

Hi Bryan, Sorry for the confusion, your initial description only mentioned "Suite", so I was just curious if you're seeing this issue with other unit types as well.  To confirm, is the issue that the units are not appearing as suggestions, or you are unable to actually locate using a unit as well? Here is some sample data I mocked up that is nearly identical to yours, and the locating functionality seems to be working successfully: I can search "#100", "Suite 100", etc. - all successful.  -Eric ... View more

Hi Bryan, To answer Michael Volz's first question (and confirm my own understanding), it sounds like you are using the new Create Locator tool in ArcGIS Pro and using the Point Address role (comparable to the "US Address - Single House" and "US Address - Single House Subaddress" styles with the older Create Address Locator tool). What version of ArcGIS Pro are you currently using, and which version was the locator created in?  Are you using points or polygons as the input reference data? Have you tested with other unit types ("#", "Unit", "Apt", "Bldg", etc.)? I would also like to see how you defined the reference data when creating the locator. Do you have screenshots of how your unit/suite information is structured in the reference data's attribute table, and how you defined it in the Create Locator tool?  Thank you! Eric ... View more

Hi Brian, I have not heard of any issues with using the ApplySymbologyFromLayer tool within C# code, but if you'd like to log a case with our Technical Support team we can definitely help investigate this issue with you. Best regards, Eric ... View more

My pleasure Tim! Simply changing the value in the Status field is probably the easiest solution for now, but keep your eyes open for those new options in the Rematch Addresses pane coming with ArcGIS Pro 2.4, which should hopefully be coming out sometime this month!  ... View more