Yes, I realize that not providing enough information, as well as providing
too much (Gone with the Wind comes to mind) limits lister's ability to help.
I appreciate the responses so far, but here are some clarifying nuggets:
A) # of "sheets" is in excess of 10,000, probably equivalent to USGS 7.5"
topos in sq km, and # of layers
B) No way to know whether, as a Geodatabase, all this data would be more
than 2Gb, but as shapefiles, they sure are, 10X as much.
C) referring to other posts, about "entering the spatial extent", I assume
this is presuming I would know the entire extent, and with 10K sheets, there
is no way ArcGIS can load 10,000 sheets at once to get the true spatial
extent, let alone Windows inability to handle a "copy n paste" of that
magnitude.
If 2GB is indeed the limitation on a personal geodatabase, all other points
are moot then, it seems. I'm reticent to fork over any other dinero to
ESRI, any alternative suggestions are appreciated.
Anthony
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross, Gregory K. [mailto:GKROSS@mail.ifas.ufl.edu]
> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:22 PM
> To: Anthony Quartararo
> Cc: gislist@lists.geocomm.com
> Subject: RE: [gislist] Shapefiles & Geodatabases
>
> Anthony,
>
> The real issue becomes how large is your data? A personal
> geodatabase can hold up to 2GB of data, and if you are able
> to get all of your data into a personal geodatabase, then the
> processing time to merge your "sheets" MAY BE reduced. If
> you're your data is larger than 2GB you may need to go to and
> SDE type database.
>
> Gregory Ross
> University of Florida
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony Quartararo [mailto:ajq3@spatialnetworks.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:01 PM
> To: gislist@lists.geocomm.com
> Subject: [gislist] Shapefiles & Geodatabases
>
> Technically mundane question for some: I've got a ton of
> shapefiles for a continuous, contiguous area. Problem is,
> they are all broken down into discrete shapefile "sheets". I
> am more than familiar with the normal process of "merging"
> the respective layers to create a extent-wide shapefile for
> each layer. However, this poses enormous labor implications,
> not to mention cramped mice-fingers. I can certainly
> important a set of shapefiles to create a geodatabase, but,
> it would appear, that the same relative problem exists: that
> of creating a lot of geodatabases, each a "sheet" worth of
> shapefiles, but not a single "bucket" to dump all shapefiles
> and come out smelling like roses, with only one geodatabase
> "layer" for each feature.
> Does this make sense ? Granted, I firmly acknowledge that I
> am not the sharpest tool in the shed, but is this a
> technology limitation of ESRI, a limitation of database
> choice, user limitation (yes, me), or a combo ?
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anthony Quartararo
> Spatial NetWorks, Inc
>
> _______________________________________________
> gislist mailing list
> gislist@lists.geocomm.com
> http://lists.geocomm.com/mailman/listinfo/gislist
>
> _________________________________
> This list is brought to you by
> The GeoCommunity
> http://www.geocomm.com/
>
> Get Access to the latest GIS & Geospatial Industry RFPs and
> bids http://www.geobids.com
>
_______________________________________________
gislist mailing list
gislist@lists.geocomm.com
http://lists.geocomm.com/mailman/listinfo/gislist
_________________________________
This list is brought to you by
The GeoCommunity
http://www.geocomm.com/
Get Access to the latest GIS & Geospatial Industry RFPs and bids
http://www.geobids.com
|
