Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Ideas
  • Add Rejected Port and Filter Tab to Writer Feature Type
Archived

Add Rejected Port and Filter Tab to Writer Feature Type

Related products:FME Form
  • September 24, 2016
  • 6 replies
  • 33 views
nordpil
  • nordpil
    nordpil
takashi
Contributor

It might be useful if every writer feature type and the FeatureWriter would have <Rejected> port and Filter tab.

<Rejected> port: Outputs features that have been rejected by the writer. e.g. features which have null or missing attributes for non-nullable fields in the destination feature type, features which have an invalid geometry against allowable geometry type or structure in the destination feature type, etc.

Filter tab: Optionally the user can specify a condition to filter features that should be written into the destination feature type, like the Tester transformer. When a condition is specified in this tab, features that do not match the condition will be output via the <Rejected> port.

Expected Advantage:

  • Allow the user to collect rejected features and create a report about them as another output dataset.
  • Make it easier to investigate the reason for the rejection in conjunction with the Inspector.
  • A Tester may be removed from the workspace for a simple data extraction and loading.
This post is closed to further activity.
It may be a question with a best answer, an implemented idea, or just a post needing no comment.
If you have a follow-up or related question, 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.

6 replies

todd_davis
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+21
  • todd_davisSupporter
  • Supporter
  • September 25, 2016

I certainly like the idea, even if it might only work with a few writers

C
Forum|alt.badge.img
  • chiron
  • October 6, 2016

Very usefull

xilef
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+5
  • xilefContributor
  • Contributor
  • September 26, 2020

Definetely agreed! I have a workspace that is writing to 2 different outputs. One of them is using a FeatureWriter to send the report as an attachment to the email notification mentionning "success". The other (the main output) is a fixed writer for now. If the fixed writer fails, I am getting a "failure" e-mail but I am still getting the "success" email from the FeatureWriter output because that part doesn't fail...

sam.mcdonald
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+3
  • sam.mcdonaldContributor
  • Contributor
  • October 4, 2020

I think it is an excellent idea, being able to handle error conditions more gracefully would be very ideal.

 

Note: I missed the upvote button, and don't seem to be able to undo my vote.......

r_huesken
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+5
  • r_hueskenContributor
  • Contributor
  • June 9, 2021

A must have, imho.

I spoiled most of the day wondering were my 250 features went when writing to KMZ (OGCKML writer). This writer automatically reprojects to WGS84. However, if you don't have a coordinate system set on a feature, you do not get any feedback from the writer that the feature could not be written (and why...).

 

I also upvoted a similar idea: https://community.safe.com/s/idea/0874Q000000TkwiQAC/detail

LizAtSafe
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+15
  • LizAtSafeSafer
  • Safer
  • February 10, 2024
Updated idea statusGathering Interest→Archived
Idea merged into:

All the votes from this idea have been transferred.

Helpful Members This Week

Community Stats

30,942
Posts
117,256
Replies
38,742
Members

Latest FME

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings

Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings
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.