Feature writer and writer outcome is different

Different formats have different limitations to their output feature types, so this is to be expected. One feature that works in GML but not in PostGIS is for example lists, the attributes with {} in their names indicate they're attributes with multiple values, PostGIS doesn't like that (in fact most other formats are not too happy about it).

If you want to get the output in PostGIS to look as much as in GML as possible you'll need to handle those lists, for example through the use of a ListConcatenator. There may be more peculiarities that you'll need to account for.

Well, it's possible to transform gdb to inspire gml, which in turn can be transformed to postgres. So it isn't a problem for me to write gml to postgres. My problem is that I find it difficult to do these forementioned things as one automated flow.

I understand there are some limitations with feature writer... So, I'm wondering how could i create such a flow...

Currently I am trying to create a new workspace and run the "gdb to inspire gml" workspace as a workspacerunner and then connecting the outcome to a postgres writer. Not sure if this is how workspacerunner is supposed to work. So far I haven't succeeded.

Hello @triintjr,

Are you able to share the workspace/sample data even if it is just our data directly before the writer? This would help troubleshoot.

Hello! Sorry to reply You so late. Yes, I wanted to run gdb to inspire gml which in turn, I wanted to write into postgres.

Right now the solution I've come up with is to use a scheduled bat file to run workspaces. This way I don't have to get all the transformations into one workspace (I can use a normal writer, instead of feature writer).