Hexagon Geospatial
MENU

Support GeoMedia

Search for an answer, post a question, or answer other users' questions in our GeoMedia support discussions. This discussion board is a great way to collaborate with industry peers around the world. It is intended for discussion and support of the GeoMedia Desktop and Add-on applications.
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 172
Registered: ‎10-26-2015
Accepted Solution

Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

Hello!

I have created a simple spatial model that attempts to automate a common GeoMedia "Analytical Merge" query against a point feature class within a ESRI File Geodatabase.

 

When I try to run the model in GeoMedia Desktop I receive the error:

 

GeometryMatchError.png

 

I can't work out why the geometry type is changing in my model. I've reviewed the documentation and can't see any mention of the FeaturesOut port changing the geometry type.

 

I attach a copy of the model if that helps with identifying the cause of the error.

Thanks for any replies!

 

Colin

Staff
Posts: 70
Registered: ‎05-26-2016

Re: Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

I simulated some Data by creating an FGDB in Geomedia. I noticed your merge geometry is 'Shape'  generally that applies to an Area feature.!

not a point feature, check your geometry name is correct.

 

I ran your Spatial Model, it ran , but i found it got stuck on on your return port with similar error. So i deleted your 'Merge Output Dataset' port and recreate it. Then all worked OK.  Think your Feature output port object was corrupted.

Staff
Posts: 70
Registered: ‎05-26-2016

Re: Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

I looked at your Port Configuration, you have 4 data types selected IMAGINE.features,IMAGINE.File, GMO.Fetures and IMAGINE Featureset

The first two i selected.  When i went to delete the last two, I got the following message Ambiguous data Name(features), could be GEOPROCESSING Features or IMAGINE Features.

 

When i left only IMAGINE.Features and IMAGINE File, my dataset took 30 seconds to process. When i simply selected only IMAGINE.Features

and removed IMAGINE.File my dataset took 1 second to process.As per my port change.

 

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 172
Registered: ‎10-26-2015

Re: Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

RolandK,

I had tried a column name of 'Geometry' but I get the error 'The attribute Geometry is missing' as FGDB databases call the geometry name 'Shape'.

 

I deleted the output port 'Merge Output Dataset' and recreated it and ensured only IMAGINE.Features was the only supported Data Type but I still get the same error about geometry types not matching.

 

How do I delete supported data types from a port, you mention you selected and deleted them? I can't select/highlight any data types I add to the port and pressing delete on my keyboard doesn't remove them.

 

I attach a copy of the dataset I'm building the model with. Use the randompoints feature class. The CRS of the data is 27700.

 

Thanks for your help.

Technical Evangelist
Technical Evangelist
Posts: 152
Registered: ‎02-03-2016

Re: Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

Roland, nice sleuthing and guidance.  Colin, a few thoughts:

 

As a general rule you want to make sure the model is well-formed and behaving properly in Spatial Model Editor before you try to get it operational elsewhere (e.g. the Run Spatial Model command of GeoMedia).  Instructions for making sure your model is crafted well for both SME and RSM are found in the help topic Building a Spatial Model for the Run Spatial Model command.  Lack of a Preview operator in the model you sent, coupled with the presence of Features Output, indicates that maybe those guidelines weren't followed.  (Note: there is nothing wrong with having Features Output there, but it's unnecessary for getting GeoMedia output and it's an additional variable here so simplifying your model step by step would begin with eliminating that.)

 

I realize that while we deliver samples that follow these guidelines, in C:\GeoWorkspaces\SpatialModels, there isn't a sample model that really demonstrates the analytical merge capability.  We have one coming up that is pertinent, so I've attached it in case useful as a reference.

 

We have made a lot of quality improvements for spatial modeling in our upcoming release (GeoMedia 2018 Update 1), so I was eager to see if we have solved a bug that might be affecting you here.  The good news is that I don't see your error :-).  The bad news is that it crashes instead (no kidding).  So there's definitely something awry here, and I encourage you to submit a support ticket.

 

In the meantime, I was able to get your model to run in SME with a little sleight-of-hand, but not to get it to run in RSM.  Interestingly, using the sample model mentioned above (and attached), I can merge your data successfully both in SME and RSM.  You might spend a little time cross-checking the definition of your model v. this one.  - Hal

Frequent Contributor
Posts: 172
Registered: ‎10-26-2015

Re: Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

Hal,

Thanks for pointing me at the product documentation and apologies for not reading that before posting. I will be sure to review the documentation properly in the future.

 

Thanks also for sharing the sample analytical merge spatial model. I have been able to use the dataset I have with this model in both SME and RSM and I've also been able to modify it to add the extra functional attribute I needed (to calculate a MAX value).

 

Regards,

Colin

Technical Evangelist
Technical Evangelist
Posts: 152
Registered: ‎02-03-2016

Re: Spatial Model Operator - Merge Features - geometry and output geometry does not match

No worries.  It's one of those help topics you couldn't even anticipate exist.  Still, as with, say, feature caching, there's a fair bit of documentary material there that is probably little-read.

 

Glad the alternate model worked.  It'd still be good to know why yours didn't but the main thing is you're on your way I guess.  - Hal

 

Do you need immediate support?
If you encounter a critical issue and need immediate assistance please submit a Service Request through our Support Portal.