Cable

Members
  • Content count

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Cable last won the day on August 15 2015

Cable had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Cable

  • Rank
    member
  • Birthday 04/29/1974

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ohio

FIleMaker Profile

  • FM Application
    14 Advanced
  • Platform
    Windows 7
  • Skill Level
    Intermediate
  • Membership
    TechNet
  • Industry
    Agriculture
  1. I can't figure this out so I thought I'd see if anyone could shed some light. I have a pricing database solution that includes 4 tables relevant to this issue. The Customer table contains all of the customer records. There is a record for each customer's location in this table (called a SHIPTO). Every customer will have a customer number and a SHIPTO code that identifies the particular location. There is an inventory table that list all of our inventory. Each record there is uniquely identified by an ITEMNUMBER. There is a pricing table where a custom price can be specified for that customer. Pricing can vary by location. The pricing table is a SQL table in another sytem. There is a temporary pricing table where the person doing the entry works on modifying prices. Once they are done, any changes are saved from the temp table over to the live table. There are various reasons for this but the bottom line is that I do not want users directly touching the live SQL data. What I have set up is that when someone wants to enter custom pricing they select a customer. They are then taken over to the inventory table and two globals are set, one for the customer number and one for the shipto code. Any current pricing is copied over to the temporary pricing table. The temporary pricing table is related to the inventory table by item number (ITEMNUMBER = ITEMNUMBER), customer number (gCUSTNUMBER = CUSTNUMER), and shipto (gSHIPTOCODE = SHIPTOCODE). I have the relationship set to allow records to be created in the temp table via the relationship. All of that is working fine. The problem I'm having is that I have a button set to show only the inventory items that have been assigned a custom price. If I hit that button it shows every item that has a corresponding record in the temp table whether it is a valid relationship or not (someone else could be pricing items for another customer). Similarly, if I query a specific price it shows all items with that price even if not in the current relationship. To illustrate: I'm working on Customer 1, shipto 1. I have 5 items priced. Another person is working on Customer 2, shipto 2. That person has 10 different items priced. So, there are 15 records in the temp table. If I query for all items with a price > 0 I'm getting 15 inventory items returned. Only my 5 will actually show prices on the screen (correctly). If I query for a specific price, such as $19.99, and I have one item at that price but the second person has two items at that price, my found set will show 3 items. Only my item will show the price and the other two will be blank. I have no idea how this is possible. FileMaker is showing the correct relational price seems to be ignoring the global parts of the relationship for queries. I have tried clearing the indexes but no luck. Any ideas?
  2. And it suddenly started working again.
  3. Apparently 3 days ago all my web viewers stopped working. They won't even load so much as Google now. Regular browser windows work just fine but not web viewers in FileMaker. They get about 40% loaded and then stall. It is happening whether the file is hosted or not, and I've tried various files including creating a new one. I'm using FileMaker 15. Anybody ever see this behavior or have any ideas? EDITED TO ADD: I have verified that this is only happening with FileMaker 15. FileMaker 14 displays all web viewers just fine.
  4. Fair enough, thank you everyone for the information.
  5. Fair enough but that is referring to a regular FM database not one accessed via WebDirect. Interestingly, part of the security is that once someone successfully logs in, they can only view records related to that particular login. So, even if someone were to find a way to force a relogin in WebDirect and access one of the accounts, only data for that one account is available. Unless I'm missing something. There are no admin accounts to access via that method. Flag fields aren't used. So, I'm not so sure Steven's post is relevant to this case. Let's say it is, though. What about the second option of creating a separate FileMaker account for each user. Can a file have upwards of 1700 user accounts without a problem?
  6. That many don't access the site at once. Just that many have logins. Many of them would only go on once or twice a year and most only once a week max. We won't be using Active Directory and probably not Open Directory. We manage creation of accounts because they have to be approved. My question, really, is whether my planned course of action of auto-logging in with a low-access account and then validating login credentials via a FM user table and then script a re-login using those credentials is sufficiently secure for my purposes.
  7. I've been researching how people handle logins for WebDirect and my head is swimming with contradictory information. On my existing website I have 1,775 users. Their account information is stored in a mySQL database. The account information is little more than username, password, company name, and real name. For the new WebDirect site, I was originally planning to autologin to the file using an account that only had access to the login screen. Then, use custom dialogue to allow the username and password to be entered. I'd use the username as a relationship between the global and the users table, check that the password matches, then do a relogin to a generic user account that has normal view/edit privileges. But then I read that you're not supposed to "bypass" FileMaker security. I'm not sure if that counts as bypassing. Then I figured I'd use a script to step through the existing users table and create accounts in the database for all 1,775 users. But then I read that some people had problems with files that had more than 1,000 user accounts. So, now I don't know what to do. We're not storing credit card information so it doesn't have to be Ft Knox secure but I don't know what direction to go in. I feel like my first option is good enough but wanted to see what some of you thought. We do have a SSL certificate for the web server. Thanks,
  8. I'm having a similar problem to others but not exactly the same. While logged in to the server, I can access the Admin Console without a problem using https://localhost:16001/admin-console. However, if I try it from a remote computer using https://10.1.1.70:16000/admin-console I get various errors: Firefox: Secure Connection Failed The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading. The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem.Chrome: This webpage is not available ERR_CONNECTION_RESET The connection to 10.1.1.70 was interrupted. Check your Internet connection Check any cables and reboot any routers, modems, or other network devices you may be using. Allow Chrome to access the network in your firewall or antivirus settings. If it is already listed as a program allowed to access the network, try removing it from the list and adding it again. If you use a proxy server... Check your proxy settings or contact your network administrator to make sure the proxy server is working. If you don't believe you should be using a proxy server: Go to the Chrome menu > Settings > Show advanced settings... > Change proxy settings... > LAN Settings and deselect "Use a proxy server for your LAN". Safari: Safari can't open the page Safari can't open the page "https://10.1.1.70:16000/admin-console". The error is: "" (kcferrordomainwinsock:10054) Please choose Safari > Report Bugs to Apple, note the error number, and describe what you did befoer you saw this message. Internet Explorer: This page can’t be displayed Turn on TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and TLS 1.2 in Advanced settings and try connecting to https://10.1.1.70:16000 again. If this error persists, it is possible that this site uses an unsupported protocol. Please contact the site administrator. Edge: Hmm, we can't reach this page. Try this •Make sure you’ve got the right URL: https://10.1.1.70:16000 •Refresh the page •Search for what you want From doing some internet searching it seems this might be due to outdated connection protocols that are common for intranet connections but dangerous for internet connections. The latest browser updates have reportedly removed support for such connections. At first I thought maybe it was just a Windows 10 problem since I recently updated but I tried a computer that was still running Windows 7 and had the exact same problem. I saw one site that described entering an exception in the FireFox about:config file but that had no effect. Is anyone else having a problem accessing the Admin Console from another computer on your Windows network? Have you found a workaround? Note that no changes were made to our network software or hardware between the time this was working and when the problem first occurred (a couple of weeks ago). My specs: FMS 14.0.2 FMPA 14.0.2 FMP 14.0.2 Windows environment (Server 2008, Windows 10 Pro, Windows 7 Pro)
  9. Mostly posting this to hear myself talk but maybe someone will find it useful or a helpful discussion will ensue... My company has deployed a FileMaker solution over iPads for our sales staff. Because they are frequently in locations with no or poor reception, their solution is offline. They sync on demand when they have a connection and can select what they want to sync. My company is also one of those that doesn't like to buy anything. So I had to make my own solution to sync. The trouble is, our sales staff isn't always the best about syncing and sometimes if they select all options it can take up to two hours to complete a sync! I went to DevCon this year with a main goal of improving the sync speed. I came back with several ideas and these are the results. Currently, my solution is set up with a separate connector file. I did this because in the past I kept having issues with corruption of the main file. It would happen regularly but ever since I switched to using a connector file it has nearly disappeared. Hurray for that! The connector file has table occurrences for the server files and the local files and uses those relationships for finding the records to update. I then do a simple Import Records:Update Matching to update the data (in most cases, sometimes I do loop through and "set field" if the data is especially important). I talked to a bunch of people and attended several sessions about FMGo and the overwhelming feeling seemed to be "NO, BAD DAN!" and I left with my head swimming with ideas of PerformScriptOnServer and looping through records and payload files. Fun. First, I did some benchmarking. With my original script I got the following sync times for five different segments (some are just one table, some are multiple): Customers: 6 seconds Inventory: 3 minutes 32 seconds Orders: 2 minutes 59 seconds Inventory Master: 3 minutes 58 seconds Pricing: 27 seconds I then went in and changed all of the syncs to loop through the records and "Set Field". I had it set all fields because it was even longer if I had it first evaluate if it needed to do a set field. Customers: 2 seconds Inventory: 23 minutes 58 seconds Orders: 2 minutes 10 seconds Inventory Master: 43 seconds Pricing: 3 seconds So I had some luck in a few places but absolutely atrocious for the Inventory sync. A couple of things to note: there were a couple of tables that I was just syncing everything instead of what was new. I believe that was the case for the Customers sync in particular. Also, the big thing for the inventory master is that it has product pictures in it. I learned about Base64 encoding and decoding at DevCon and I'm sure that was the winning ticket for making that sync go faster. I'm guessing even the import version would go quicker if I was to use that instead of importing the large picture files. Since the data changes regularly, I wanted to be sure that I had good numbers to work with. I was telling the script to sync 10 days worth of changes. I reran the benchmarking today to different results (this time it was over wireless instead of cellular because I was running out of data on my plan): Old Script: Customers: 2 seconds Inventory: 12 seconds Orders: 31 seconds Inventory Master: 8 minutes 59 seconds Pricing: 15 seconds New Script: Customers: 4 seconds Inventory: 2 minutes 35 seconds Orders: 1 minute 24 seconds Inventory Master: 13 seconds Pricing: 6 seconds On the whole, it would seem that looping with set field is not a good method if you want speed. Of course you can argue it is more reliable so there's a trade-off. I wanted to experiment with running the query on the server and then sending over just data for the Inventory sync (about 1700 records). I used PerformScriptOnServer to pass the date to be synced. I had the server find the records I needed then loop through them and capture the data into a variable. I then set that into a data table field. The iPad copied over the data and I had it. But now what to do with it??? First I tried unpacking it into a temp table and then using Import to update the data. 5m 10s. Ok, that's twice as long. I then unpacked it directly into the table to update by querying the item ID. I update the data if found and added it if it wasn't (wasn't even concerned with deletions at this point). 9m 1s. That's going the wrong way!! So, with the exception of making sure I sync only the records that were changed and using Base64 encode/decode for pics it looks like I'll be sticking with the import function. One good thing is that the two users I've switched over to FMGo 14 are saying syncing is going a little quicker than when they were on FMGo 13.
  10. You're looking at it backwards. FileMaker server cannot import from the iPads because it can't see them. However, the iPads can see FM server! So, you add table occurrences to the server in your iPad solution and then you can import from the iPad tables to the server tables.
  11. So here's a weird one. I'm wondering if anyone else has seen it. Overview: I have a database for tracking plant inventory for a wholesale plant nursery. The size of the pots is measured as a gallon size and abbreviated in the system. So a 1 gallon pot is a G1, a 2 gallon pot is a G2, a 3 gallon is a G3, etc. I have two layouts for viewing the data in either a list or as a form to show more information. Pretty standard stuff. When you click on a magnifying glass icon a script runs to see if you're on a iPad or iPhone. If you are, it sends you to a layout optimized for mobile devices. Otherwise it sends you to a layout that has existed for about 10 years. In FileMaker 12 it works perfectly. In FileMaker 14 it works perfectly. In FileMaker 13 it works for everything except a G2. For the G2s it hangs and just spins and spins and never goes to the detail record. I always have to force close FM. At first I thought something had happened and all of the G2s somehow got corrupt. But, if I change the size for that record to, say, a G3, it works just fine. Change it back to a G2 and it hangs again. But again, only for FM13 (both Pro and Advanced). Since I plan to switch everyone over to 14 in a month or so I suppose it doesn't really matter, but it is bugging me why this could be happening. Anyone ever see something like that before?
  12. pc

    Figured it out. You need to use the Classic theme or risk the flattening issue. Also, I meant to post this under FM13 general not server...
  13. pc

    Recently I've had an issue where PDF's generated from FileMaker take a very long time to print (20 minutes) and the dialogue box says they are "flattening". The internet seems to think this has something to do with transparencies in the PDF but I cannot figure out what is causing it and why it happens with some PDFs but not others. At first I thought it was caused by having a corner radius but that wasn't it. Anybody else see this behavior or know what causes it? -- Dan White
  14. Yes, you can script the creation of as many related records as you want. Just capture the parent ID in a variable, go to the child table and create a new record, set the key field from the variable, and switch back to the parent layout. But, I don't see how that is a good solution to your query. If I was doing it I would search for staff that have vaccinations and then show omitted to see the staff that don't.
  15. I've seen two things cause this to occur. One was that I had a plugin (Dataguard) that limited changes to a record. Since the iPad app couldn't run the plugin the edit was failing but no error message was being displayed so the iPad was locking the record but it wouldn't unlock until a force quit. The second way was when I had File Access security set to "Require full access privileges to use references to this file". Even though I had the file set as authorized, it would still fail and lock the record. This started happening a couple of months ago after one of the Go updates and continues to this day. I had to shut off that security setting in order to get it to reliably work. Not sure if this helps but it might trigger a train of thought that leads to the right station.