Using RM 11.5.0.0 on a MacBook Air with OS Tahoe 26.5.2, 16GB Memory. While RM is open, the only other apps open are SnagIt, WhatsApp, and a couple of Chrome browser sessions.
Using TreeShare for initial load as recommended by RM Support after failed attempts to load a GED file from Ancestry.
RM has permissions to access my Documents, Downloads, and Database folders.
Ancestry tree size 57,333 people.
Resulting RM tree size 57,273 people.
I have identified the missing 60 people by extracting RM people, extracting GED file people that I previously downloaded from Ancestry thinking I would use GED file import, dumping both results in columns of an excel file and doing a V lookup.
The 60 people span about 4 families and a couple of random single people, but all look perfectly normal in Ancestry.
One of the key reasons I use RM is for the Relationship Calculator. The missing 60 people include 4 different DNA connections to shared ancestors. This means the results will not be reliably accurate, which would defeat my purpose for using RM.
I did confirm the Person ID’s dropped are all at the low end of the sequencing in Ancestry, so length 11. Not in a contiguous block though. And there are plenty of people with either 11 digit or 12 digit person IDs that did load.
Any idea what might be going on? Any known tricks or tips to force RM TreeShare to pick up missing people that it previously failed to load?
That is the default. I found that “only changed people” on an initial load includes everyone in the tree. But thanks for alerting me to that checkbox. I will use it once I try out TreeShare for updates from Ancestry to RM.
I have good news! It was my own error, not RM code, at fault. In my previous attempts when “deleted the files” before rerunning the process, but I could not remember if I actually deleted the file in the AMT folder for this tree ID. Yes, a dumb oversight on my part. This time I definitely did delete it. And I set my laptop to stay awake. No sleeping on the job.
I am super happy to report that after making these 2 changes to my process, the TreeShare process completed and it it loaded exactly the same number of people that I have in my Ancestry tree. Woop woop! Hopefully one day someone else will find my fiasco useful.
I am always curious as to the reason behind people having thousands and thousands in their database.
It seems they have issues with TreeShare and are surprised with how long it takes to run.
I agree it should work 100% with no issues as it does with my less than 1k people database
My tree size is not considered large that I am aware of. I read somewhere on RM documentation it was considered “moderate size”. Ancestry is usually extremely fast, no processing issues there, only this one bit with loading the full tree to another database. All in all though, I think I’d rather keep my family members than shrink my tree by lopping some off here and there
In my case, several factors grew my tree to this size. The main reason my tree grew out of the gate is that I am a grandchild of all Swiss immigrants who were/are in a Swiss-German anabaptist church similar to Mennonites, farmers living rurally with large families. My maternal grandfather was one of 13 children by his father’s 3rd wife. He had 6 half siblings by his father’s first wife.Large families were also common in rural Switzerland. In the US, one aunt had 15. Another had 13. Nearly all of those 1st cousins had equally large families in the US. I am the unicorn of the whole lot with only 1 sibling and 2 kids.
Another reason is that in retirement, I got into DNA research. This makes your tree go broad, as you record and research your DNA matches and their ancestral trail up to your shared ancestors. I don’t just add/research my solo DNA match but their entire family. That way, I recognize when their siblings, parents, or children decide to test as they are already in my tree.
Another reason my tree grew is that I retired and just spend more time on it. The analysis and collaborative aspect of it all brings me joy. So I work on it almost every day unless I am traveling or sick.
The beauty of family history is that each of us can make our own unique contributions as we see fit. We each have our own specialties. Some excel at online research, some are great at interviewing people, some are natural born story tellers, some have a store of family photos to share, some collaborate well, some work better in isolation. Some help adoptees find bio parents. It’s all good worthwhile effort.
Personally, I have 50K+ in my file because I don’t just limit to the main ancestral lines. For example, my 4th great grandfather had 9 kids. I am tracking descendants from all 9 of those kids. Each of those 9 had at least 5 and as many as 13 kids of their own. Each of those 70 something grandkids all had 3-10 kids…so after a few generations, that amounts to a lot of people. Imagine that scenario for all of the ancestors and you do end up with a large tree. I don’t know how anyone can have less than 20K if they have managed 5 or 6 generations down their family lines.
Yea, I’ve been working on filling in gaps on my maternal line and the only practical way is tracing parallel families due to all the intermarriages. You end up with two children in a parallel family and go what the hell, add the rest, then you find out one of the children of one you just added intermarried another branch, and there was three kids there that intermarried, so what the hell, might as well add the rest, … on and on .. next thing you know you have 50,000 people.
I have not created a new RM file from Treeshare for ages and I have never used a Mac, but I have seen lots of examples of Treeshare missing data from Ancestry. See my long series of posts here (there are actually other posts in other threads) and recent comment on this thread.
All these problems seem to have a common theme, information going missing between Ancestry and Treeshare apparently at random. As I have noted in my posts, I see three possibilities. 1) Ancestry may not be sending the complete data, 2) the data may be getting lost between Ancestry and Treeshare and the communications protocol may not be robust enough to detect and rectify this or 3) Treeshare may for some unknown reason be failing to process all the data it receives.
As to your specific question, to have Ancestry resend data on any person, just force a change in their profile. I generally add a letter to the detail of a birth record or whatever and then delete it again. This person should then show up in Treeshare.
I always check that I end up with the same number of people in the two sides.
