Get error when uploading ANcestryDNA

[Jim Barrett]

(1.) No, why would I hesitate to buy an autosomal test from Ancestry because they don't allow upload of autosomal tests from FTDNA?

(2.) I'm Swedish and I chose Ancestry because of their large databases of both DNA tests and historical records. Actually, the Sweden DNA Project at FTDNA recommends Ancestry for tracing Swedish ancestors in original records (such as church books): https://www.familytreedna.com/groups...out/background

(3.) Are you sure about that? Ancestry has, by far, the largest autosomal DNA database size, it more than 10 times as big as FTDNAs. I got 1000+ matches at Ancestry.


(4.) Ancestry does not offer Y-DNA or mtDNA tests anymore. Who knows, I might try both FTDNA and LivingDNA. The point is: I wanted to upload my atDNA to FTDNA to compare the quality of their autosomal matches to Ancestrys, but I can't since FTDNA do not seem to accept Ancestry files at the moment.

(5.) And there is no problem with my DNA-file, it worked just fine at MyHeritage.

(1.) I don't know, you are the on who said they were hesitant about buying the test from FTDNA not me. You wont buy Y-DNA from FTDNA because they wont accept your atDNA transfer, but it doesn't bother you that Ancestry wont accept your atDNA transfer.

(2.) Family Search has more Swedish records than Ancestry.

(3.) Have anyone who has transferred atDNA from recent Ancestry test buy an atDNA test from FTDNA and see which kit has the most matches - the transferred kit or the purchased kit.

(4.) Ancestry did sell Y-DNA and mtDNA with the promise of matching. What happened to that promise. FTDNA sold me a Y-DNA test in 2002 and I can still see my matches.

(5.) Maybe MyHeritage doesn't require the quality of results FTDNA requires.

(6.) Which companies require the payment of a subscription few to see the most information about your matches. Pay over and over and over! It seems to me Ancetry and MyHeritage aren't after you for your DNA, they want your subscription fee.

[Epiphyte]

Re: Swedish DNA
In my experience, FTDNA is particularly good for finding DNA matches with Swedish ancestry! I have vast numbers of Swedish matches on FTDNA's Family Finder, and almost all of my zero distance full sequence mitochondrial DNA matches are Swedish. I attended a series of lectures on Swedish genealogy last year at the American Swedish Institute in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. The genealogists who gave the lectures were from Sweden. They said that in Sweden, FTDNA is the preferred test and I do not believe they had any financial incentive to say this. They were aware that Americans are more likely to test through Ancestry. Personally, I chose to test separately on Ancestry and FTDNA. I tested on Ancestry first, in 2016, and my closest match was 4th cousin. In 2017, I decided to purchase the Family Finder and full sequence mitochondrial DNA bundle from FTDNA. When you exclude distant cousins at the two companies, I actually have more matches on FTDNA despite the larger database at Ancestry. I transferred my FTDNA Family Finder DNA to MyHeritage in 2018 because I knew they used the same chip. MyHeritage is also excellent for finding Scandinavian matches. Over half of my matches on MyHeritage are Scandinavians. I have the data plans at both companies right now because I wanted to compare them and I got good sale prices on both. So far, they seem comparable. You can access Swedish records independently if you like. In my opinion, the test at FTDNA is a very good value, especially if you wait for a sale. I also like the fact that they store DNA samples for future use in case you want to order additional tests in the future, and allow you to designate a beneficiary. This is critical for those of us testing family members in their 80s and 90s! Who knows, maybe we'll be able to upgrade to full genome in a few years!

[joe4227]

Maybe GEDmatch and MyHeritage are not as particular about the quality of the data they accept. Maybe people should complain because Ancestry doesn't accept transfers from FTDNA. I have never understood why it is always FTDNA that is the bad guy.

If you want your results on 23andMe, what do you have to do? If you want your results on Ancestry, what do you have to do? If FTDNA is the bad guy, it is because they started out trying to accept data from the other companies!

Jim, FTDNA is certainly not "Always the bad guy". It's just the guy that we've all paid our money to. Accountability and Service to the (paid) client base is what's at issue - not whether Ancestry or anyone is changing their files. Ancestry recently upgraded the chip they use. That has necessitated ripple to the data files, which now contain NEW entries for previously unused values. Those are the changes that are happening. Not some surreptitious change to the structure. The data is simply a text file. There is NO MAGIC. And any IT dept worth its salt can adapt and modify to accommodate those changes. IT remains the weakest link of FTDNA. Or at least the lowest priority.

[turhant]

I could upload my ff raw data to gedmatch however it gave an error on myheritage and dna.land

Is there anybody who have this problem recently and whats the solution ?

[Germanica]

(1.) I don't know, you are the on who said they were hesitant about buying the test from FTDNA not me. You wont buy Y-DNA from FTDNA because they wont accept your atDNA transfer, but it doesn't bother you that Ancestry wont accept your atDNA transfer.

I think the difference is that AncestryDNA doesn't offer any uploading at all, whereas FTDNA does, it's just not working (for AncestryDNA files) at the moment, and that suggests a concern on quality control and customer service. While I do not think that alone is a good reason to not trust the company, I will admit that FTDNA takes a while to resolve any problems with the upload option (though, AncestryDNA are rarely quick to resolve technical issues with their own site either - primarily because unless it's a massive issue like people not being able to access the site at all, they'd rather stick their heads in the sand and pretend there's nothing wrong than actually make an effort to fix a minor tech problem).

(2.) Family Search has more Swedish records than Ancestry.

FamilySearch doesn't offer DNA services at all so that's irrelevant.

(3.) Have anyone who has transferred atDNA from recent Ancestry test buy an atDNA test from FTDNA and see which kit has the most matches - the transferred kit or the purchased kit.

Yes, it's true that since AncestryDNA updated their chip to V2, the difference in the raw data means fewer matches for the upload, because the amount of overlap between the two companies is less: https://isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_SNP_comparison_chart

This is really neither company's "fault", it just is what it is.

I still think it's more cost effective to test with AncestryDNA and upload to FTDNA. Most, if not all of the matches you'll be missing by uploading to FTDNA are likely distant matches, many of which may not even be identical by descent anyway. The most important matches, the ones that share enough DNA to be most likely (or assuredly) identical by descent, will all be there whether you upload or test directly with FTDNA.

(5.) Maybe MyHeritage doesn't require the quality of results FTDNA requires.

It's nothing to do with quality. AncestryDNA keeps changing the data arrangement within their DNA file downloads. The data itself isn't changing, so the quality can't go up or down - it's just been reordered or rearranged. No other company seems to have issues reading it no matter how it changes except FTDNA. To me, this suggests that FTDNA's system is less "smart" or sophisticated - any slight change to the layout or order of the data and FTDNA's system is all, "oh no, me no understand".

(6.) Which companies require the payment of a subscription few to see the most information about your matches. Pay over and over and over! It seems to me Ancetry and MyHeritage aren't after you for your DNA, they want your subscription fee.

AncestryDNA does not require a subscription to see most information about your matches. You can contact your matches and ask for an invite to their tree and see their information that way. Yes, it's more cumbersome, and not everyone agrees to send an invite, but it is possible. You have to remember that Ancestry (and MyHeritage, for that matter) is a genealogy website that provides billions of genealogical records which aren't cheap for them to obtain and host, so they require a fee to access most of them. But if people could create a free account and access family trees for free, most probably wouldn't bother to subscribe, because they'd just copy everyone else's trees for free (there's already a lot of copying of trees, but at least it's less than it would be if people could do it for free). So they have put the family trees behind a paywall too, otherwise very few people would bother to pay and then they might lose so much money they go out of business.

FTDNA doesn't have to worry about that because they don't provide genealogical records since they're not a genealogy website. Good for them. But in my experience, it is very beneficial and convenient to have one's tree, DNA, and access to genealogical records all in one place.

[joe4227]

It's nothing to do with quality. AncestryDNA keeps changing the data arrangement within their DNA file downloads. The data itself isn't changing, so the quality can't go up or down - it's just been reordered or rearranged. No other company seems to have issues reading it no matter how it changes except FTDNA. To me, this suggests that FTDNA's system is less "smart" or sophisticated - any slight change to the layout or order of the data and FTDNA's system is all, "oh no, me no understand".
.

Germanica - it IS to do with quality - quality of response time and effective service offerings. Since they offer the capability to upload Ancestry files and advertise same, it is a breakdown in service when that does not work. And you are absolutely incorrect that the "data itself isn't changing". In point of fact, Ancestry is using a newer Array Chip, and that is providing much more physical data in the file, including SNP's/Markers that were not there in their Version 2.0 format. If you take a file from about a year ago, and compare it side by side with a new one in a text editor (they are just text files, after all) you will see the obvious differences and larger volume.

So, how hard is it for the people at FTDNA who maintain the conversion program to update that program to read the new format. I suspect the problem goes deeper. The new data likely includes items that FTDNA does not currently scan/report - so there is nowhere to park this new data when it is converted. FTDNA is lagging behind in their coverage, and it is beginning to show.

I understand that they will err on the side of caution, but if they were more forthcoming about what's happening - including posting to the fb page or here - to keep the client base informed, I bet there would be much less dissatisfaction...

But they are SILENT and the silence is deafening. There is no explanation from them, officially, or otherwise, or any expectation of when or whether a fix will be provided. And the recurrence of this problem over a four year period really fuels speculation.

You are correct, however, that other companies seem to be dealing with the changes quickly and effectively, while FTDNA is not. I just uploaded the same file to MyHeritage. It took seven days to process, but it all converted and posted and works fine. If they can do it, why can't FTDNA?

[Jim Barrett]

I have no idea why some people can transfer new raw data from Ancestry and others can not. I just had two kits added to one of my projects. Both were the results of new Ancestry transfers.

[hbic3]

Is there any actual solution to this problem? When I click the one link to a fix, I get a 404 page. When I download the fix tool, it just dumps and does nothing after "press any key to continue."

[MaryfromItaly]

I've just had an email from FTDNA to say that they've solved the problem, and it looks as though they have, up to a point.

I tried to upload my original Ancestry file (downloaded in December 2018), and it didn't work. I then tried the same file fixed with the tool recommended upthread (which I'd done in the past, and the upload always failed), and this time it worked!

So that's good, but I would have thought the upload ought to work with no need for the fix. Maybe it does on more recently downloaded files.

[Germanica]

Germanica - it IS to do with quality - quality of response time and effective service offerings. Since they offer the capability to upload Ancestry files and advertise same, it is a breakdown in service when that does not work.

I was responding to someone who was suggesting that AncestryDNA's raw data was of inferior quality, not about FTDNA's quality of service.

And you are absolutely incorrect that the "data itself isn't changing". In point of fact, Ancestry is using a newer Array Chip, and that is providing much more physical data in the file, including SNP's/Markers that were not there in their Version 2.0 format. If you take a file from about a year ago, and compare it side by side with a new one in a text editor (they are just text files, after all) you will see the obvious differences and larger volume.

More isn't necessarily better, but I'm not disagreeing with you either.

You are correct, however, that other companies seem to be dealing with the changes quickly and effectively, while FTDNA is not. I just uploaded the same file to MyHeritage. It took seven days to process, but it all converted and posted and works fine. If they can do it, why can't FTDNA?

Like I say, I think their system is not as "smart" and they do not prioritize manually updating it.