Spatial Join Error

[MatthiasAbele]

Hallo,

I am trying to perform a spatial join. I always get the error 999999 if I set the merge rule of one field to maximum? What could be the reason? If I use first (default); it is working.

Matthias

[RichardFairhurst]

Hallo,

I am trying to perform a spatial join. I always get the error 999999 if I set the merge rule of one field to maximum? What could be the reason? If I use first (default); it is working.

Matthias

Maximum only works with numeric fields and will not work with text fields.  Your field must be a text field, and first and last are your only options.

[MatthiasAbele]

Thanx for the hint...but that cannot be the reason. All fields to be joined are numeric (short with values of either 0 or 1). As I said: With "first", it is working; minimum or maximum make the tool fail...

I am clueless....but I really need to do the operation!

Matthias

[MichelleFlynn]

Matthias did you ever get an answer to your problem?  I'm seeing the same error, but mine shows more information, "ORA-01795: maximum number of expressions in a list is 1000".   The table I'm doing the join on has just over 3,000 entries, I cannot make that smaller than 1,000.

At this point I'm not sure what to do.

When I run a join on the table in ArcMap from the Layer Properties window it works, I just can't run the spatial Join tool. I would like to run the tool from a model.

Any advice?

Thanks
Michelle

[MatthiasAbele]

Hi Michelle,

no, I never got a response nor a solution from our ESRI service contractor.
But I figured out the following: The spatial join tool seems not to be able to
handle opreration in which many fields are involved - independetly if the
features are calculated somehow or only transferred.  So I reduced the
number of fields / columns to a minimum and rejoined the previously deleted
colums afterwards. So far, not all joining has been done....let's hope the
best...

Do you know 3dr party tools, which are able to perform the same operations?
I found none.

Yours

Matthias

[NoelPeterson]

I'm having trouble with this same error today. I need to obtain the maximum of a field which had been stored as a double, but actually only contained integer values (i.e. employment counts were stored in a double, but you can't actually employ fractional people). The spatial join worked when using the double values, but when I copied the values into a Long field and tried the spatial join using the new field, I got an Error 999999. Very frustrating!

[mikeking1]

Unfortunately I have a similar issue with the maximum merge rule(but no answer as yet).  I have a buffered road feature class with 4 numeric (float) fields that identify the category of buffer.  I wish to spatially join these to a parcels layer so that each intersecting parcel is thereby identified by the buffer it intersects.  By setting the merge rule for the numeric fields to maximum I get the maximum number of intersects for any parcel that intersects the buffer feature class - this is all very nice and works swimmingly.  HOWEVER - for all of the parcels that do not intersect in the spatial join (ie too far away from the joining class) I get -3.402823e+038 calculated into the numeric fields instead of zero.  It doesn't matter if I set the field precision or not or disable null values I still get -3.402823e+038 returned for non intersected parcels!?

The interesting thing is if I change all numeric inputs in both the target and join feature classes to short integer (as my feature classes only hold 0 or 1 for the fields of interest) instead of their original float type - the spatial join bombs out with a generic windows 9999 error and an unhandled exception written to the log file. 

Presumably the only reason that this can happen is because -3.402823e+038 is a float or double type and is being returned from the underlying ArcObject - it therefore generates an error if the field to which it must be written is an invalid datatype (ie short integer).  Is this a bug in the Arc10 object model?  I am running ArcGIS Desktop 10.0 service pack 4.

At this point I should probably mention that the same result does not occur in 9.3.1 SP3.  Certainly appreciate any light that can be shed - I'm stumped as I need the Maximum merge rule for the analysis!

[NoelPeterson]

Exactly, kingmi. I'm also seeing the -3.402823e+038 values returned as the maximum for target polygons with no join features when using a Double field, and I was also thinking that those values are what is causing the process to bomb out when trying to use a Short/Long instead.