I have a file with the field "phone numbers". How do run a report
finding only "unique" phone numbers.

Thanks

In article <1178031818.019967.254140 (AT) p77g2000hsh (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
jc (AT) agncs (DOT) com wrote:

Some ideas:

1. Do a find for duplicates in the phone number field. In the Find mode,
put and exclamation point ! in the field and click Find. That will
return the duplicates. They will not be sorted; to show the duplicates
next to each other, do a Sort on the telephone number field. Going to
Table view may be helpful.

2. For only the unique numbers, after you do the Find for the
duplicates, do Records >> Show Omitted Only

--
For email, change <fake> to <earthlink>
Bill Collins

On May 1, 11:17 am, Bill <bbcoll... (AT) fake (DOT) net> wrote:
To be clarify this only shows the numbers that have no duplicates. In
other words if a number is duplicated in the database it won't show up
at all using this solution.

3. If you just want exactly one of each phone number above, perform
the find and sort as in 1) above, and then write a script to loop
through and detect and omit the 2nd..nth duplicates.

cheers,
Dave

"d-42" <db.porsche (AT) gmail (DOT) com> schreef in bericht
news:1178045708.345861.225900 (AT) c35g2000hsg (DOT) googlegroups.com...
IMHO there are drawbacks for using this sytem. First I have found that the !
is not exactly reliable. I have performed ! searches and found records I
knew were unique.

I would create a self-relation using this field.
Then create a calcfield using a count function
Then find all records the have a count > 1
Then sort them on the field
Then with a script omit the first record of each set
Set a mark for the records you want to chuck out, but leave them for now
loop through the found set

then in the end find all the marked records
export them (just in case)
then delete them

This problem has been talked about many times before, and there are other
ways to do this. But it is never easy. But I would surely allways mark
alleged double values, keeping them for now. Then later export them before
deleting them.

Keep well, Ursus

On May 1, 3:32 pm, "Ursus" <ursus.k... (AT) wanadoo (DOT) nl> wrote:
Thank you all for that. I think Ursus last explanation will cover all
the bases.

Thanks again to all of you for your input.

In article <463795c4$0$23836$dbd43001 (AT) news (DOT) wanadoo.nl>, "Ursus"
<ursus.kirk (AT) wanadoo (DOT) nl> wrote:


I have noticed that in the past. I performa Find using "!" and then
sort the records by the same field to group the supposed duplicates ...
and as I flip through them I find records with no actual duplicate.
\

I've never bothered to look any closer at it. It might be something to
do with FileMaker rather "fuzzy" Find.
eg.
Find "house" find not only "house", but also "glasshouse"
and "firehouse", etc.


Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

On May 2, 3:09 am, Helpful Harry <helpful_ha... (AT) nom (DOT) de.plume.com>
wrote:
In my experience, Finds don't return word fragments from within text,
e.g. a find for house would return "house" and "Dan Houser" but not
"glasshouse" or "firehouse". Am I wrong or were you talking about
something else?
Nate

Finding house will find you houseparty as well.

keep well, Ursus

In article <1178111801.874244.250260 (AT) h2g2000hsg (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
NScheffey <NScheffey (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

You're right - those were bad examples. As ursus says, it will find
things like "houseparty" where the Find word starts any word within the
field.

As above, I'm not sure whether or not that's the cause of the Find
duplicates bug, but there's definitely a strange problem with the "!"
Find, at least in earlier versions of FileMaker.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)