Wim Decorte

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Wim Decorte

  1. The Data API works through HTTPS only. With your self-signed cert you will have to get past any warnings from that and most integrations just won't. They'll expect a valid cert with no warnings. You can configure POSTMAN to disregard SSL warnings (google for that) to get you through the testing but for production you'll need to get a valid SSL cert. The "method not allowed" may be because you are using the wrong HTTP method for the wrong action. What is that you are asking the Data API.
  2. what are you showing in the web viewer?
  3. Can you describe this a bit more? What if you test with one key field, then with the second and see if the resulting record set is plausible. If the resulting sets are ok with these two then the 3rd key may produce the logical data set but not the set that you expect...
  4. What two? There are 6 options shown. In your description of set1 and set2; the difference is obvious, no? set1 will encrypt the files while at rest. set2 will remove that encryption.
  5. Not sure I follow entirely, but in your script, just before the "Show Custom Dialog" just do a Set Field [Examples::MASTER CODE ; "" ]
  6. You make it really hard to help you. Whether you want to use portals or not is totally irrelevant at this point. You first have to articulate what it is you want to do. Saying "something like CDBABY" is meaningless to us, and so is posting only screenshots without explanation. The only thing we can do with that is infer meaning and make assumptions about what it is you want. We shouldn't be making assumptions to help you; you need to explain exactly what it is you want to see and exactly what you should happen when the user goes through your UI.
  7. I have no suggestion because you have not explained what you want to achieve and why. Start by explaining what the UI should do.
  8. Why don't you explain how CDBABY works or what about it that you really like or that your users expect? Pretty sure that repeating fields are not going to be the answer.
  9. don't know their api but you are missing the async key. Perhaps they require it?
  10. Of course it is working, for most people under most circumstances. Since this is an integration there are always a lot of different variables involved that can run interference especially in a Citrix environment that multiplies the number of moving parts. Do a search on this forum and other forums for 'server busy'; it is something that has come up for other people.
  11. to expand on that; you have this isEmpty ( Sub9First_Semester or Sub9Second_Semester) this part: Sub9First_Semester or Sub9Second_Semester will result in a boolean result; 0 or 1, so it will never be empty
  12. You may consider at least getting FM16 and getting familiar with all the features; because at some point you'll have to switch strategies and when you must, that would be a particularly bad time to have to catch up on what there is...
  13. Try to format your formula so that it is easier to read and follow: Case( Sub1E1 = ""; ( Sub1Q1 + Sub1Q2 ) / 2; Sub1Q2 Sub1E1 = ""; Sub1Q1; Grade_Level ≥ 11; ( Sub1Q1 * .4 ) + ( Sub1Q2 * .4 ) + ( Sub1E1 * .2 ); Grade_Level < 11; ( Sub1Q1 * .45 ) + ( Sub1Q2 * .45 ) + ( Sub1E1 * .1 ) ) The 2nd test in there: is "sub1q2 sub1e1' one field name?
  14. @comment mentioned the solution already; since you don't care when you increment; just a have a scheduled script that runs on January first and increments the age field by 1. If you want to use that new field you just created then create a nightly schedule that does the same but just for those records where that date field is exactly a year ago. Do a search on that new date field for Date( month(<your date field>) ; day( <your date field> ) ; year(<your date field>) - 1 ) If you find records then loop through those. If no records are found, exit the script.
  15. You have a 'parcels' key/node that is not correct. It should immediately start with an array as per their API, you start it as another piece of JSON with another 'parcels' key name
  16. and if you want to keep it more readable and at the same know what options are supported in FM, you can use this: https://community.filemaker.com/docs/DOC-8177
  17. If you take that piece of your code and put in the data viewer it will tell you what is wrong. Look at the output and compare it to what is required. Some quick ones: - you don't need the ampersand after the first -H - you don't add spaces between the different sections
  18. Agreed. It usually does not take 360 attributes to describe something. And having that many calculated fields will end up being some performance problem somewhere along the line. So instead of helping you do that; describe what that table is all about and we can probably help you with a better solution.
  19. What kind of unproductive statement is this? You do realize I hope that this just antagonizes? I'm assuming that you are frustrated; if so then say that instead of making these kind of statements. Having said that, of course there is beta testing. But beta testing is no guarantee that there will be no bugs or unintended behaviors.
  20. We'd need more information about the actual call, the configuration, the FM file, etc. I did a test a few weeks ago to compare the new FMS16 Data API to the XML API for speed and was asking for 10,000 records. No errors. So I don't think it is the # of records necessarily that is causing this. What is the result if you just use the -findany command?
  21. You have to uninstall FMS14 before installing FMS16 and provided you configure it the same way (all the settings) then the files will be have exactly like they did before. As to where the files actually reside; I'm assuming that you are talking about the Remote Container feature/ If so it really all depends on how you configured the container field and FMS.
  22. Do you really want to get 1000+ records in one go? Is this for a user-facing routine?
  23. That's not how I understood @rondawes's setup. Commercial hosting is where clients upload & host their own files on your infrastructure. And in that scenario: yes: each client will need their own FMS and license. But if all clients use rondawes's solution then it is not commercial hosting of the type that FMI restricts.
  24. No, the old concurrency is still there. On the their website, follow the 'legacy' link.
  25. Not sure what you mean by the old behavior. Can you describe it a bit better? The big windowing change is only on Windows where the overall application window (app shell) is no longer there. But even then each file always opened in its own window. What is it that you find you can not do anymore? Minimize the whole application at once?