* Ancestry to FH7 via RM Essentials

[DM1956]

Does anyone know why RM Essentials assigns different Record ID numbers to individuals than those used in Ancestry? I am using that programme to transfer all my Ancestry data including media to FH7. When I previously used Gedcom to update FH7 from Ancestry the Record ID's remained the same, as expected.

[Mark1834]

Welcome to FHUG. Getting different apps to talk to each other in a consistent way is always a bit of a challenge, but can you clarify a couple of points please?

What exactly do you mean by the Record ID in Ancestry? AFAIK, there isn't a Record ID as such displayed in Ancestry, unless I've missed it.

Are you intending to start a fresh tree with your RM import, or use it to update your existing tree?

There's a lot of Ancestry and RM users here, so hopefully we'll sort out what's going on!

[DM1956]

Hello Mark,

Thanks for your prompt response. To clarify, I've always maintained my tree in Ancestry, but realised it's time I migrated to a fully functional family history programme. I purchased FH7 last year, and since then have periodically populated it with Ancestry generated Gedcom updates as my Ancestry tree grew in size..

Whenever I've done a Gedcom transfer of my Ancestry tree to FH7, I'm individual ID 1, and my family are ID's 2,3,4, etc. Thereafter parents, and grandparents follow the number sequence. Essentially the individuals list in FH7 replicates the way I built my tree in Ancestry over the years, ie the most relevant people at the top, the latest findings at the end.

As I currently only have a Gedcom transferred tree in FH7, I'm missing all the media files etc. I wish to replace that tree with a full direct transfer from Ancestry, and I understand that there is currently no direct way to do this other than using a third-party genealogy program such as Roots Magic Essentials as an intermediate step.

When I do this Roots Magic creates its own sequencing of individuals, which does not correlate in any way to the above Gedcom structure. So, when FH7 imports the Roots Magic data, it uses that newly created sequencing to create individual ID's. The individuals list in FH7 is thus presented in a very unhelpful format, for example the 1st person on the list being an obscure non blood relative that was person number 351 when I used Gedcom, whilst I'm relegated way down the list to ID 453 with my family etc. listed thereafter.

This end result is a consistent yet unhelpful structure, despite three separate attempts to mimic the Gedcom structure.

Hope this clarifies.

David.

[Mark1834]

Thanks David - very clear. I think you are doing absolutely the right thing in migrating your master tree off Ancestry to a desktop app such as FH, but you probably wouldn't expect any other answer on this forum!

The short answer is that I don't think your current system is sustainable in FH, but there are good alternatives.

The longer answer - when Ancestry creates its GEDCOM file for export/import, it assigns each individual a reference number, starting at 1 and continuous with no gaps. I don't know whether it works its way down the tree starting with the home person, or follows the order individuals were created, but it sounds like they may be more or less the same thing in your tree. When FH imports the GEDCOM file, it uses those reference numbers as the Record IDs. Ancestry generates them consistently by whatever system it is using, so Record IDs in FH are consistent between imports.

However, when you link an Ancestry tree within RM, GEDCOM doesn't come into it. It is directly linking the RM database structure with the Ancestry API. Similarly when you import your RM file into FH, FH is reading the RM database structure directly without invoking GEDCOM. Somewhere in those transfers, the apparently logical sequence is being lost. In a way, it probably doesn't matter for us exactly where, as it is what it is, and we have to work with it.

It's important to remember that the Record ID has no particular significance in FH. If you add a new individual, FH will allocate the lowest available number that hasn't already been used (it keeps track of deletions). So as soon as you add a new person to anywhere other than the least significant corner of your database, your logical sequencing is lost.

If you want to maintain a "significance" ordering, the usual way of doing this is by using the Custom ID field. This is fully under the user's control (unlike the Record ID), so you can use whatever system you like. My main interest is direct ancestors, their siblings, and the siblings' children (and occasionally one more generation if there is a particular point of interest). So I still use the system I devised decades ago in the pre-internet age, where I am S01, my parents are R01 and R02, their parents are Q01 through to Q04, etc. My siblings are S02, S03, etc, and with suitable suffixes for married-in spouses and children, I can see instantly how near or how distant the relationship is and how many generations are in between. If I discover somebody new, it doesn't take long to adjust numbering accordingly, so it is a dynamic system that accommodates new discoveries.

There are plenty of other ways of doing it, and your optimum probably depends on what type of relationships you are interested in and how big the database is. My experience is that about 1000-1200 individuals is about the realistic database size if you are not particularly interested in distant cousins, but there are plenty of users here who have many tens of thousands of individuals in their project.

PS added in edit: Have you discovered the "Relationship to Root" column in the Records Window? It's a long way short of what you would like to see, but at least it groups similar relationships together.

[tatewise]

I agree with Mark that the GEDCOM/FH Record Id should not be relied upon to identify any particular sequence of Individuals.

Apart from the FH Records Window, Rec Id column order, most other displays show people in family relationships which are independent of Record Id.
To show Individual records in a standard 'family' order in the Records Window there are other options.
Mark has already suggested Custom Id, but also consider the Ahnentafel number that FH calculates automatically, or the various relationship names and codes that group close relatives together.
e.g. Try Query > Relatives & Relationships > Ancestors or Immediate Family
Ancestors gives Ahnentafel number, Generation, and Relationship.

[DM1956]

Thank you both Mark and Mike for this very useful information. You have each provided me with excellent ways in which I can structure my individuals listing in FH7. I'm very grateful to you both for your invaluable help.

David.