 | |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Relationship Question -
12-19-2005
, 03:40 AM
|
In article <herh73x3u9.ln2 (AT) stikman (DOT) com>, jeff.nospam (AT) stikman (DOT) com says... Bill Marriott <wjm (AT) wjm (DOT) org> wrote: Jeff, This is kind of going around in circles. As you are stuck in FileMaker 6, you need a single key field to use as the basis of a lookup. (FileMaker 7 and 8 would let you define multiple criteria, the two fields you want.) Therefore, combine field 1 and 2 with a calculation to create the unique field you need. Why wouldn't this work? Thanks for the information. I will see what I can make work. I guess the main issue I have is that in FileMaker 6 I can only have one key field for the relationship. As Bill has suggested at least twice now: defining a calculation as: fieldA & " " & fieldB and using that as the key field is virtually equivalent to having "actual composite keys". (I say 'virtually equivalent' because there are some corner cases that can require some forethought, but to all intents and purposes you can use field concatenations in calcs as composite keys.) -regards, Dave |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
Or he could first create a calculated key. Let it run its course. then go back into the define fields and change the contents from calc to text. The field will retain its contents, but now it is a normal text field rather than a calculated text. Ursus "42" <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> schreef in bericht news:MPG.1e0fef21c2bfbc5c989e07 (AT) shawnews (DOT) vf.shawcable.net... In article <herh73x3u9.ln2 (AT) stikman (DOT) com>, jeff.nospam (AT) stikman (DOT) com says... Bill Marriott <wjm (AT) wjm (DOT) org> wrote: Jeff, This is kind of going around in circles. As you are stuck in FileMaker 6, you need a single key field to use as the basis of a lookup. (FileMaker 7 and 8 would let you define multiple criteria, the two fields you want.) Therefore, combine field 1 and 2 with a calculation to create the unique field you need. Why wouldn't this work? Thanks for the information. I will see what I can make work. I guess the main issue I have is that in FileMaker 6 I can only have one key field for the relationship. As Bill has suggested at least twice now: defining a calculation as: fieldA & " " & fieldB and using that as the key field is virtually equivalent to having "actual composite keys". (I say 'virtually equivalent' because there are some corner cases that can require some forethought, but to all intents and purposes you can use field concatenations in calcs as composite keys.) -regards, Dave |
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.