Skip to main content
Solved

opening an old workspace saved in a version of FME prior to 2012

  • September 8, 2017
  • 11 replies
  • 36 views
mygis
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+14

Hi, I received an old workspace which was created with FME 2008. I receive a warning message box stating that "Missing attribute reference detected in pre-2012 workspace".

 

Is there an easy workaround to use it on 2017.1?

1. I have opened the file in FME 2010 then saved it, a few issues where resolved but not all.

2. I was thinking of opening the workspaces in each version of FME from 2009 to 2012, not sure if this would make sense.

 

In my point of view I would ask the creator of the workspace to re-design it as many new/existing transformers can do the job much better now than before.

 

Any pointers would be much appreciated.

 

 

Thanks.

 

Lyes

Best answer by erik_jan

Hi Lyes,

I would definitely recommend re-creating the workspace(s) to the customer.

A good argument could be improved performance (next to increased options on functionality).

And FME 2008 is officially no longer supported. That counts as an argument for most customers too.

Erik

This post is closed to further activity.
It may be an old question, an answered question, an implemented idea, or a notification-only post.
Please check post dates before relying on any information in a question or answer.
For follow-up or related questions, please post a new question or idea.
If there is a genuine update to be made, please contact us and request that the post is reopened.

11 replies

david_r
Celebrity
  • david_rCelebrity
  • September 8, 2017

The message simply states that the newer version of FME has detected some problems with the workspace that the original version couldn't detect. So in principle you can safely ignore the warning, although I'd make some extra tests to verify the results compared to previous runs.

I agree that continuing development on such an old workspace can feel like a step back, especially when you know how much more compact and efficient you could've made it with a more recent version of FME. In this situation I'd try to explain / justify to the client why refactoring the workspace would make sense.

mygis
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+14
  • mygisSupporter
  • Author
  • Supporter
  • September 8, 2017

The message simply states that the newer version of FME has detected some problems with the workspace that the original version couldn't detect. So in principle you can safely ignore the warning, although I'd make some extra tests to verify the results compared to previous runs.

I agree that continuing development on such an old workspace can feel like a step back, especially when you know how much more compact and efficient you could've made it with a more recent version of FME. In this situation I'd try to explain / justify to the client why refactoring the workspace would make sense.

I agree on your second point @david_r, they are running error messages apparently. I need to sit down with them and check their entire environment.

 

erik_jan
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+22
  • erik_janContributor
  • Contributor
  • Best Answer
  • September 8, 2017

Hi Lyes,

I would definitely recommend re-creating the workspace(s) to the customer.

A good argument could be improved performance (next to increased options on functionality).

And FME 2008 is officially no longer supported. That counts as an argument for most customers too.

Erik

david_r
Celebrity
  • david_rCelebrity
  • September 8, 2017

Hi Lyes,

I would definitely recommend re-creating the workspace(s) to the customer.

A good argument could be improved performance (next to increased options on functionality).

And FME 2008 is officially no longer supported. That counts as an argument for most customers too.

Erik

I agree. I tend to be careful about using improved performance as an argument, as I've seen that that's not always (no longer) the case. I've seen some examples where workspaces running in FME 2014 were an order of magnitude faster than the latest incarnations.

 

Personally I usually go for the arguments a) FME version is no longer supported, and b) workspace maintenance will be easier, since it can be made more compact with fewer transformers.
erik_jan
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+22
  • erik_janContributor
  • Contributor
  • September 8, 2017
I agree. I tend to be careful about using improved performance as an argument, as I've seen that that's not always (no longer) the case. I've seen some examples where workspaces running in FME 2014 were an order of magnitude faster than the latest incarnations.

 

Personally I usually go for the arguments a) FME version is no longer supported, and b) workspace maintenance will be easier, since it can be made more compact with fewer transformers.
Agreed, but I have never seen a case where FME 2008 was faster than FME 2017.

 

 

david_r
Celebrity
  • david_rCelebrity
  • September 8, 2017
Agreed, but I have never seen a case where FME 2008 was faster than FME 2017.

 

 

Excellent point.
mygis
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+14
  • mygisSupporter
  • Author
  • Supporter
  • September 8, 2017

Hi Lyes,

I would definitely recommend re-creating the workspace(s) to the customer.

A good argument could be improved performance (next to increased options on functionality).

And FME 2008 is officially no longer supported. That counts as an argument for most customers too.

Erik

I agree with both of you @erik_jan,and @david_r

 

 

mark2atsafe
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+58
  • mark2atsafeSafer
  • Safer
  • September 8, 2017

Yes, it used to be that we would ignore attributes that were missing. For example, if you told the AttributeRemover to remove MyAttribute, and MyAttribute didn't exist, then all would be OK (at least Workbench wouldn't complain, though the translation might have errored).

Now (and since 2012) we've become stricter and would flag that transformer as having an error. That way the translation wouldn't fail.

So the dialog is saying that something in the workspace refers to an attribute that doesn't exist. The "workaround" is to let FME flag up these issues so that you can fix them. If you want to run it in a newer FME then I don't see another way. I don't see any use in opening it in a series of other versions.

Since that workspace is now nearly 10 years old, yes, it's probably time to consider updating it to the latest FME (though once you have fixed the attribute references it *should* work fine)

FME Evangelist to the Rich and Famous!!
mark2atsafe
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+58
  • mark2atsafeSafer
  • Safer
  • September 8, 2017

Hi Lyes,

I would definitely recommend re-creating the workspace(s) to the customer.

A good argument could be improved performance (next to increased options on functionality).

And FME 2008 is officially no longer supported. That counts as an argument for most customers too.

Erik

Yes, 2008 is no longer supported, but I think a workspace created in 2008 should be. If it failed in 2017 then I think we'd still want to do something about that. Still, I don't like to think anyone is still using FME2008! It would be pretty old technology now.

 

FME Evangelist to the Rich and Famous!!
mygis
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+14
  • mygisSupporter
  • Author
  • Supporter
  • September 9, 2017

Thank you @david_r, @erik_jan ,and @Mark2AtSafe for confirming that the best is update the workspaces.

mygis
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+14
  • mygisSupporter
  • Author
  • Supporter
  • September 9, 2017

The message simply states that the newer version of FME has detected some problems with the workspace that the original version couldn't detect. So in principle you can safely ignore the warning, although I'd make some extra tests to verify the results compared to previous runs.

I agree that continuing development on such an old workspace can feel like a step back, especially when you know how much more compact and efficient you could've made it with a more recent version of FME. In this situation I'd try to explain / justify to the client why refactoring the workspace would make sense.

This answers is correct as well. just that I cannot accept more than 2 sorry ... I just + it

 

 

Community Stats

32,120
Posts
121,954
Replies
39,772
Members

Latest FME

Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement
A product of
Safe Software respectfully acknowledges that we live, learn and work on the traditional and unceded territories of the Kwantlen, Katzie, and Semiahmoo First Nations.