Hi Andy, both .gpx and .kml files are written in xml, so you could open
them and read it with notepad++, or with a simple python script, and use
some regex or something to trim all of the coordinates to fewer decimal
places.  That would be a good way to incorporate this into your workflow...

On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Adam Lodge <[email protected]> wrote:

> Andy,
>
> Happy to help, but unfortunately, we don’t have a solution in our hip
> pocket. We have only encountered this kind of issue when transferring
> larger numbers of records from legacy systems into Arches. Therefore, our
> solution is a bit one-off.  And, I am a bit surprised that geometry (that I
> assume was) collected with GPS units would be voluminous enough to surpass
> that threshold.
>
> That said, what I have done in the past is run the data through an
> appropriate FME transformer or use Postgis (st_snaptogrid function) to
> process the data in a manner that resolves the issue.
>
> Starting to move beyond my domain of expertise, but it seems likely that
> there is a gdal function that you could bind to your python ETL/integration
> code that may do the trick.  Wish I could point you to something more
> specific.  Maybe someone else can?
>
> One other thing - I highly recommend you start with reducing precision
> rather than generalizing.  You preserve much more integrity of the data and
> still likely achieve your goal.
>
> Adam
>
> --
> Adam Lodge
> Geospatial Systems Consultant
> Farallon Geographics
>
> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Andy Graham wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info Adam.  I figured it was something like that.  In this
> case generalizing the gpx probably is acceptable.  Do you guys know of or
> have a quick and easy program/code to do this?  I can manage this with a
> few steps but I visualize this being part of the daily work flow so would
> prefer more of a single step, "push a button and it's generalized" type
> setup.  Let me know.  Thanks.
>
> Andy
> On May 1, 2016 2:17 PM, "Adam Lodge" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Andy,
>
> There is a known limitation - Im guessing from your error message that
> 32766 - to the number of characters that Elastic Search can process in a
> single value.  This translates into a geometry limitation because (I think)
> ES indexes geometries as geojson. In short, I think it’s less about the
> size of the file and more about the number of characters necessary to
> describe the geometry.
>
> We have done some tricks to push geometries like these through.  They
> include:
> - Reduce the precision of the captured geometries (thereby reducing the
> number of characters after the decimal that gets stored for each vertex)
> - Generalize the geometry (if that is acceptable.) That reduces the number
> of vertices in the geometry.
>
> If you are able to send the file, I would be happy to take a look at it.
>
> Adam
>
> --
> Adam Lodge
> Geospatial Systems Consultant
> Farallon Geographics
> 415.317.6625
>
> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Andy Graham wrote:
>
> So I have been trying to add geometry to one of our resources by dragging
> and dropping a .gpx file onto the map in the edit form for the resource.
>
> I can add it to the map just fine but when I go to save I eventually get
> an error on the webpage that states:
>
> TransportError at
> /resources/SURVEY.E1/default/1510042c-6888-4fc9-8658-cd5cee6a8bdb
>
> TransportError(500, u'IllegalArgumentException[Document contains at least one 
> immense term in field="geometries.label" (whose UTF8 encoding is longer than 
> the max length 32766), all of which were skipped.  Please correct the 
> analyzer to not produce such terms.  The prefix of the first immense term is: 
> \'[77, 85, 76, 84, 73, 76, 73, 78, 69, 83, 84, 82, 73, 78, 71, 40, 40, 45, 
> 49, 50, 48, 46, 53, 54, 57, 57, 53, 49, 48, 51]...\', original message: bytes 
> can be at most 32766 in length; got 100421]; nested: 
> MaxBytesLengthExceededException[bytes can be at most 32766 in length; got 
> 100421]; ')
>
>
> From what I can tell it appears as though there is a size limit on the
> files used to create the geometry?  I have done this successfully with
> smaller gpx files, this current one is about 300KB.  I have converted to a
> kml but get the same message (albeit with a smaller byte size), and the
> size of that file is 165KB.
>
> Does anyone know for sure if size is the issue here and if there is a way
> (and how) to increase size limits for files to create geometry?  Thanks
> much.
>
> Andy
>
> --
> -- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe,
> send email to [email protected]. For more
> information, visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Arches Project" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
> --
> -- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe,
> send email to [email protected]. For more
> information, visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Arches Project" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe, send 
email to [email protected]. For more information, 
visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Arches Project" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to