Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Auraboros

Go to Related Record in Portal broken

9 posts in this topic

Hi...I have created a database using a "modified" anchor buoy method and so far everything works great...but...I have a portal in a "join table" that works fine...however, my button that is supposed to open the record in the portal row does not function...it returns nothing. The records are indeed related (see RG) as the fields show up from the related table without relational conflicts, but this button that is supposed to open the "library" table with the related record pulled up simply does nothing. 

I have attached the DB. Also a screen shot of the table where the portal is (it is actually a join table layout, this may be the problem). I don't understand how the button (with the little arrow) does not go to the table that the actual portal record, which IS related because I see it show up on the portal row...what is not right here?

Thanks!

Todd

Relation error.png

Hayen RG.png

**MusicalAmericaPRESUB copy.fmp12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, the link to the file doesn't work, can you try again please?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I did some work on it, still not solving my issue, I tried to delete files and it deleted everything...I am reuploading...

 

 

**MusicalAmericaPRESUB copy.fmp12

Hayen RG.png

Hayen Relational error.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...first of all, for some odd reason I sent a file that had the wrong relationship set up...which obviously didn't work...but the "right one" didn't work either...

I have to ask...the relationship I tried to set up for the "Go to Related Record" was to get to the music library table (the TO) NOT to go to the Join table with a field put on the table from the music library table.  Why is your way the only way to make it work, and in all of my other "Go to Related Record" arrows in other portals I go to the table itself that has the record I want...I know this doesn't make sense...

Look at the attached screen shot...why can't I go from the T03a_JMC_join_jmc|musiclibrary portal directly to T03aJT_JMC_musiclibrary with its appropriate layout (Music Library)...?? I would like to know the logic I am missing here.

From a practical point of view...I need the arrow to go to the related record in the music library table with the music library layout. I think you will say "well, that isn't the table that the portal is related to"...but isn't the T03aJT JMC musiclibrary table related to the T03a JMC join jmc|musiclibrary table (which is the portal)? Sorry...I am relatively new to this...

Also, it seems in other tables where I have portals I can do this sort of relationship. I need that arrow in the portal to go to the table that the music library record is actually in, not the join table that links it to the contact table...

Hope this makes sense...and thank you!!

Todd

Screen Shot 2017-05-18 at 3.09.24 PM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Auraboros said:

why can't I go from the T03a_JMC_join_jmc|musiclibrary portal directly to T03aJT_JMC_musiclibrary with its appropriate layout (Music Library)...??

If you look at that layout, there are no foreign keys populated.  Your T03a_JMC_join_jmc|musiclibrary is a join table.  So T03aJT_JMC_musiclibrary is another occurrence of Music Library.  They should be joined 'many' (T03a_JMC_join_jmc|musiclibrary) to 'one' (T03aJT_JMC_musiclibrary)-the opposite way you have it.

Is this right?

Edit:  Modifications to GTRR button, relationship and value list

Note:  It's still not 'right' but are we on the right path?

--MusicalAmericaPRESUBmod2SM.fmp12

Edited by Steve Martino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes...the arrow in the portal now goes to the correct table and layout. The way you contend is correct still has the arrow going to the join table layout, which is not where I want it to go.

I am not familiar with all of this enough to see the logic error. I AM trying to do something that may either be impossible to do, or the way I have attempted to do it faulty.

Contact > Market Event | Contact Join Table > Market Event (many events to many contacts)

I also want the Market Event Join Table to have this relationship:

Market Event Join Table > Market Event | Music List Join Table > Music List (many music pieces to many event join table records)

Weird...but makes sense...

Contacts are linked to events, which are email mailings that have links on them to pieces of music. I am trying to track each piece of music a contact clicks on in an email mailing (market event). The Market Event | Contact Join Table links Contacts to Marketing Events. Then, with each of these individual links, I want to see what pieces of music that contact clicked on in the email. I thought the only way to track this would be to have a portal in the Market Events | Contacts Join table...so far, all of this seemed to work fine in the RG. But then I want the usual "go to related record" in that portal in the Join Table that takes the user directly to the music piece (Music Library layout and records)...here other information about the piece of music will be kept...does this work??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you say the T03aJT_JMC_musiclibrary cannot be the "one" and T03a_JMC_join_jmc|musiclibrary be the "many"...?? (I need to learn this stuff, I am just confused). T03a_JMC is a join table...joining another join table (T03_Join Music|Contacts (truncated to JMC). I am probably hopelessly confused...

The way you set this up the first time does work. (see screen shot). I think I was confused that these tables needed foreign and parent keys...the music library table doesn't need a foreign key because it isn't a child to any parent table...the join table is always foreign keys because it simply links to parent keys...I had the relationship backwards, like you said, and tried to create a parent key in a join table, which made no sense. Is that what I did?

Thank you! I think this solves it...NOW...I need to also relate the music library to invoices! But that comes later! I'll be back!!!!

Todd

Screen Shot 2017-05-18 at 7.26.41 PM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By NewBoard
      I currently have a form that contains a portal. In the portal there is a value that will either be "Accepted" or "Rejected". I'm wondering if there's a way to parse through this table to check if any related values have a "Rejected" or if they are all "Accepted". Then using that outcome, decide if the form should display Rejected or Accepted.
      Please let me know if I need to provide any more information and/or images.
      Thanks in advance for any assistance you can offer!
    • By Martin Pineault
      Hi,
      I have a configuration table (named 'Usager actif') with 'Projet ID actif' and start/end date values (field name 'Bilan date début' and 'Bilan date fin') linked to a timesheet table (named 'FTemps lié Projet bilan') to show only the records that match, according to the following relation:

      This table is also linked to a step table (named 'Étapes lié FTemps lié Projet bilan') to show a list of steps used by the timesheet table (named 'FTemps lié Projet bilan'), base on the following relation:

      So the last table (named 'Étapes lié FTemps lié Projet bilan') is shown in a portal and it's working correctly (show only two steps used, for all the timesheet records). But I wanna show the total time used for each step (first step is 5 hours, and last one 95 hours). It's working correctly if the start/end date included all timesheet records. But if I shrink the ending date (removing 2 hours from the timesheet in step 2), the total time by step still show all time since the context does not follow from timesheet table to the step table in relation.
      I still see 5 hours for step 1 and 95 hours for step 2 (should be 93). The total time for all step is now 98 hours, since the ending date has been shrink (removing 2 hours on step 2).
      How can I do this (hope fully I'm clear enough)?
    • By NewBoard
      I am currently building a database to handle the inspection sheets used by our Quality lab. Here is the relationship layout:

      For each revision on the Revisions table, I have a differing number of Dimensions that need to be measured (some parts/revs will have 5 dimensions, while others will have 15). Each dimension has a specified type of instrument used in measurement, and a max/min value. The instrument used is a drop down menu that references a list of instruments/gages that we use.
      Here is how I have my inspection sheet currently laid out:

      The portal on the left points towards my dimensions table. It shows the data corresponded to the specified Part Number and Revision level. The data contained in this portal is uneditable from this form. The portal on the right points towards my RecordedDimensions table. It will store data that will correspond back to the Lot# associated with that inspection sheet.
      I also have a table that pairs all the different types of instruments we use, with their corresponding gage ID's:

      Now I would like my user to be able to click on the dropdown box under Instrument#, and that drop down box will only show the Gage ID's for the specified gage. So, if on the dimensions table, a dimension calls out for Digital Micrometers to be used, then when my user goes to select the instrument ID (which is saved in the RecordedDimensions table) it will would allow them to choose 151, 152, 153, 306, 324, 330, and 331.
      Please let me know if I have not provided enough information/pictures, I will gladly provide more.
      Thank you in advance for any assistance you can offer me!
    • By BCA
      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
      Etc.
      Seems like I’m missing something and there might be a more efficient way. Thank you for any help.
    • By Johstrom
      Hi,
      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,
       - Johan.