GIS organizations commonly exchange data using either shared services or file geodatabases (FGDBs). Both approaches are valid and widely used depending on organizational requirements, technical capabilities, and project objectives.
For ongoing data-sharing initiatives, many organizations contributing to Esri Community Maps prefer service-based sharing, because it can support centralized data management, streamlined workflows, and integration with modern GIS platforms.
Service-based sharing also aligns well with Esri’s Community Maps production workflow. However, FGDBs remain an appropriate and valuable option for offline delivery, project-specific exchanges, archival requirements, and situations where service-based sharing is not available.
Understanding the Two Approaches
Shared Services
Shared services provide access to data through a centrally managed and maintained source. Users access the current dataset directly rather than working from distributed copies.
File Geodatabases (FGDBs)
FGDBs are packaged datasets that can be transferred and stored locally. They provide a snapshot of data at a specific point in time and are commonly used for offline workflows and data exchanges.
General Considerations
The following table highlights common considerations when evaluating service-based and FGDB-based data sharing approaches.
| Consideration | Potential Advantage of Services |
| Access to Authoritative Data | Services provide access to a centrally managed dataset, helping users reference a common source of information. FGDBs represent a copy of the data at a specific point in time. |
| Integration with Existing Workflows | Services can be incorporated into a variety of GIS workflows, applications, and automated processes, reducing the need for manual handling of data files. |
| Schema Consistency | Services generally maintain a consistent structure that can help reduce the need for data standardization and schema review. |
| Data Management | Service-based sharing can reduce the need to distribute, store, and manage multiple versions of the same dataset. |
Considerations for Production Workflows
When service-based data sharing is available, it can help support standardized and scalable production workflows.
| Aspect | Potential Benefit of Service-Based Sharing | Considerations for FGDB-Based Sharing |
| Workflow Efficiency | Services can support more streamlined ingestion and integration processes. | Additional processing and review may be required for individual file submissions. |
| Quality Management | Consistent access to a managed dataset can support ongoing quality assurance practices. | Quality review is typically performed on each dataset submission. |
| Scalability | Services can help simplify the management of contributions from multiple data providers. | Managing increasing numbers of files and versions may require additional coordination. |
| Operational Management | Centralized access can support consistent data management practices across workflows. | File-based exchanges may involve additional storage, tracking, and version management activities. |
Considerations for Data Contributors
Organizations that contribute GIS data may also experience operational benefits when sharing through services.
| Aspect | Potential Contributor Benefit |
| Reduced Administrative Effort | Maintaining a single shared service may reduce the need to create and distribute multiple data exports. |
| Data Stewardship | Contributors retain management of the authoritative dataset while making it available to downstream users. |
| Communication Efficiency | Centralized access can help reduce requests for replacement files or clarification regarding dataset versions. |
| Alignment with GIS Practices | Services align with data-sharing approaches commonly used in enterprise and web GIS environments. |
| Overall Impact | Service-based sharing can simplify ongoing data exchange and support consistent access to authoritative information. |
Key Takeaway
Service-based sharing can provide efficiencies for organizations managing ongoing GIS data exchanges by supporting centralized access, consistent schema management, and scalable production workflows. At the same time, FGDBs remain an important and appropriate option for many operational scenarios.
Best Practice Guidance
Where practical, shared services are generally recommended for ongoing data-sharing initiatives because they support:
- Centralized data management
- Consistent access to authoritative information
- Integration with modern GIS workflows
- Scalable data-sharing practices
- Reduced duplication of datasets
Many organizations prefer service-based submissions for these reasons, and service-based sharing aligns well with Esri’s Community Maps production pipeline.
However, FGDBs continue to be an appropriate solution for:
- Offline data delivery
- Project-specific exchanges
- Archival and historical data needs
- Limited-connectivity environments
- Situations where service-based sharing is unavailable
Ultimately, both approaches serve important roles within GIS data management programs, and the most suitable method should be selected based on organizational needs, technical requirements, and workflow objectives.
Esri Community Maps Briefing
To see this blog in 6 slides click the briefing below.
Additional Resources
What are Hosted Features Services?
Publishing Hosted Feature Services
Questions? communitymaps@esri.com
Article Discussion: