[BM V8i SS4] XFM annotation sometimes not updated

HI Jan, I don't see anything in our systems that indicates this to be a known issue.  Would you be able to upgrade to a more recent version of SQL Server, or migrate the data away from using MSLINKS?

Hi Inga,

Inga Morozoff said:

I don't see anything in our systems that indicates this to be a known issue.

Thanks for the information. This is not critical issue, but mostly annoying issue and when there will be free time (which means probably never ;-) I will have to do some debugging what exactly is happening inside, what is sent to DB etc. But as usually, when a bug cannot be reproduced easily and happens from time to time, it's not simple task.

Inga Morozoff said:

Would you be able to upgrade to a more recent version of SQL Server

I do not think it has anything to do with SQL Server version. And I really hate to think about "upgrade to newer version" as standard workaround.

Inga Morozoff said:

or migrate the data away from using MSLINKS?

It's long term goal, but there are plenty of reasons why it will not become soon:

• I am not aware of any Bentley tool that can make the migration automated and simple. So every feature have to be analysed and script implemented to ensure only valid data will be transformed and it will not break existing integration to database from other systems.
• Bentley do not provide any tool to maintain data quality. Because the project was started in GeoGraphics time, it "survived" conversion to XFM and from first XFM version to current one. Because of that, some issues as "duplicated root geometry" are reported. I am not aware of any tool able to identify these issues and also any guidelines how to solve these issues. Migration script will have to take care about these problems and to solve them.
• Spatial storage seems (based on my current knowledge) does not support some basic features that are used in "technical maps / technical GIS systems" like annotation leaders. So every feature has to be tested and when such issue is found, it has to be discussed whether it's really required or can be
• Data model is under constant development. Because of long history (and how features were modeled in GeoGraphics), there are plenty of features now useless or duplicated that should be merged step by step.
• Because BMPV does not allow spatial data editing, it has to be discussed how to change existing workflows to ensure required tasks with existing licenses.

I'd like to maintain this project, long-term friendship exists and in fact it's probably the last my customer that use BM / XFM for something like GIS (all other left Bentley in favor of competitive solutions), but it's really tough work. Especially when things like not working INSPIRE (WFS) support, reported years ago (and crucial for any EU company), still don't work, localization is so bad it confuses and misleads users, and for smaller projects (which is also this one) there are plenty of local best practices and guidelines to be handled using open source and/or local software.

With regards,

  Jan

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.  I'll be sure to pass them along.