8 posts in this topic
I have a database that keeps track of computer system information. I have a record for each system (one per room). Within this system there are a number of different computer devices and I want to track settings such as IP addresses subnet masks and other network type information.
I have a table called “Systems” and I’m using tabs to separate the different devices within a system. Within each separate tab do I need to create a unique field for each piece of information or is there a more efficient way to do this? For example:
the first field would be device one IP address
the second field would be device one subnet mask
The third field would be device one preferred DNS
The fourth field would be device one IP address
The fifth field would be device one subnet mask
The sixth field would be device one preferred DNS
Seems like I’m missing something and there might be a more efficient way. Thank you for any help.
I hope that someone on this community is able to assist me in a rather complex dynamical filtering of portals... I am working on a pretty complex CRM based on this demo for dynamical filtering of portals by Sara Severson: http://www.soliantconsulting.com/blog/2013/03/dynamically-filtering-filtered-portals
But I have an issue when trying to dynamically filter the portal based on several relationships, that someone here maybe can answer... This is my situation:
Filemaker file A (the CRM) contains a portal which I filter. The portal show posts from file B (Contact database) with the use of a relationship X. The relationship match fields in the two files are global fields containing just "1" - which matches all posts.
The filtering of the portal here is working great. I can filter posts from the Contact database without any issues. But I would like a second dynamical filter field in relationship with a file C (an Order database) so I can narrow down the contacts in regards to what they ordered.
So I made, in file A, another relationship between file B (relationship X) and file C (Order database). Here I match a client ID in file B with a client ID in file C. And adjusted the portal filter criterias accordingly, so it took notice of this second filter field.
And yes, now it seemed that I could filter out specific orders, to find, for example, only clients in city X (from the file B, the contact database) which has bought item A (from the file C, the order database). But I noticed it didn't find every client with a particular order - after some debugging I found out that this procedure did only find the latest order a client made, in file C.
In other words:
If client A (from contact database) ordered item A and then later item B (posts in the order database), the filter did only find the client's order of item B. If I try to filter for item A, it found other clients that ordered this item, but not the client which ordered both A and B.
It seems that the relationship between file B and C only matches the latest match, which seems a little odd.
If I put a portal in file B (the contact database), with relationship of Client ID with file C (the order database), Filemaker found all orders, but only the first row in this unsorted portal here is found by the filter in file A.
Any ideas? How can I make the relationship between file B and C in file A to find all orders?
Here an image of the tables in file A, with some complementary information: https://postorder-hstrom.tinytake.com/sf/MTUxODk5N181Mjg2NDAz
With kind regards,
I have filmmaker server 15 deployed at my office with high speed TWC Static IP address. I've opened up all the ports per filmmaker instructions but I cannot connect from my home network and all of my 8 employees on their own home networks cannot connect either. Any thoughts or possible solutions to try?
By Wayne Irvine
I want to start at 1 for the next quarter, but it is currently 13 days before the end of this quarter. Logically I could start auto-enter serial at -13 and incrememtn by 1. So the first record would be -13, then -12 etc.
Doesn't seem to like it. First record is -13, second is -14.
Is this a bug, a feature, or known behaviour?