Jump to content

mak

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About mak

  • Rank
    member
  1. Obviously, it is possible to export records that are grouped by particular fields. But I have to import that exported records to create new table. So it means if I'm making it automated by the script, I'll need to do something like this below within script Assuming there are 1000 records here, and there are 3 fields such as FirstName, Gender, and State So something like this => Mike, Male, CA 1. sort by Gender field and State field for grouping 2. set a variable for export destination path. 3. export records (gropued byGender field and State field) to the variable above. Assuming it became 200 records for total after grouping as result. 4. import the variable(exported records) to particular field. Yes, I want grouped records within the same filemaker solution as new table. Can I make this more sophisticated? If I use MS Access, I can obtain grouped records within 10 seconds within a solution.
  2. Thanks for the help! That's the point! Even if you did it, the number of records is 6 not 5... What if I want to use next sub-summary out of these decreased 5 records after 1st sub-summary? Do I need to make new table?
  3. Thanks for a comment. If I could do grouping within the same table. That's the best but I don' know how to...
  4. Assuming there are fields such as FirstName, Age, and State. Here's all the records in a table 6 records all John 19 CA Andy 27 TX John 34 NY Jake 21 WA John 19 OR Andy 17 TX If I want to group them by FirstName and Age, I would make a calculation field that is 'FirstName & Age' as text. Then make this as unique key then I'd try to create records to other table so that I can make these grouped by combination of 2 fields. But it takes just a bit time to do so because I have to run script of Loop and set field. As the larger number of records, it tales longer.... Is there any way to make these records grouped real quick just like MS Access's grouping? Do I always need to make another table and calculate field to make unique key? Is there any other easy way to acomplish? I could go with sub-summary view but it actually won't decrease records. It just show visually grouped. The number of records is still the same. I want actual shrinked records by grouping. How can I?Do O always need to create new records to other table via relationship? I want them to be like this 5 records all John 19 Andy 27 John 34 Jake 21 Andy 17 I want to acomplish something like this if I'm doing with MS Access. 1st query . gropued by FirstName and Age 2nd query . grouped by FirstName and State 3rd query . Left Join 1st query.FirstName=2nd query.FirstName
  5. No, I haven't. I think it doesn't really matter because it returns quick if I do "Import records from ODBC" with the same condition. Thanks for an advice. I tried this now result returns "?" It's so weird because indeed there are few records whose 'kanymd' are 20140201 ExecuteSQL( "Select count(*) From TableName Where kanymd = 20140201 ;"";"" )
  6. Why does it take forever to count with this SQL? ExecuteSQL( "Select count(*) From TableName Where kanymd between '20140201' and '20140228'" ;"";"" ) btw, the format type of kanymd is based on Number, not date type. For your information, it doesn't take time at all if I try to Import records via ODBC with the same condition. Also it takes less than a second if I do the same thing with MS Access. Any advice?
  7. I'm using Stacked Column Chart. This output has to be printed in black and white. So it has to be easy to judge what color means what column. I thought it's possible to chose color for each column but I cannot find how. Is it possible to do so? If not, what color scheme pattern is the best for black and white only prints?
  8. @Wim I work with "import from ODBC source" and trying to do 'find' in 'find mode' e.g. There's table A and related table B then both are accessed via ODBC. I have a layout for table A and it has table B's related field Z. If I go to 'find mode' and type "20100101...20131231", it takes forever to show the result. Am I supposed to use only SQL query in this case?
  9. Thanks guys. I know how to do summary using the found set or the related set. But I have to have an actual new field(summary) for that or, I have to created new relationship for that. I can get the same result by just few step if I use MS Access. So I just wanted to know how to do this real quick. Brian's way looks the best solution in my case so far.
  10. Thanks for a reply. What if admins refused to add a unique serial to views? That's the point. So far, I import all the records to local first so then it doesn't need to have a unique value column. But it's too much work to do summary of all of the records in MySQL server. Any another good way?
  11. I'm trying to connect to MySQL server via ODBC. MySQL views are only open to analyzer such like us. However, it seems most of those views don't contain primary unique key. So it keeps showing the error below. "The selected columns contains some non-unique value.... " Is there any another way to use MySQL data source via ODBC within Filemaker even if the view doesn't contain unique key column? MS Access allows me to do that. By the way, it's hard for me to add id(serial) to view because I have no permission to it. Any good solution?
  12. MS Access has 'group by' and it easily shows the number of records after grouped by particular field. e.g. [DATA ( 5 records ) ] Type Quantity 001 1 001 1 002 3 003 1 003 2 MS Access shows 3 (The number of records after grouped by 'Type') and result below in a second. 001 2 002 3 003 3 As far as I know, I have to make another table to have unique record(by 'Type) , and to count quantity. This is too much work compared to MS Access. In another way, I have to Make List view and add'sub-summary when sorted by' to it, and sort every time In addition, it won't tell me 3 (The number of records after grouped by 'Type') Are there any easy tips to achive this in another way?
  13. I'v been using Filemaker for more than 5 years. Most of the time, I was using Filemaker server with filemaker pro as clients. Now, I'm facing the big problem of performance of Filemaker when using ODBC. If I make MS Access to link to external SQL Server via ODBC, it works okay (e.g Just easy search something like A_table.a_column="1" and related_B_table_column<100) However, it seems taking forever for filemaker to do the same thing above. Why does it take so long? Is filemaker supposed to be using with only SQL queries when using ODBC? Can't I just do regular 'find' after bringing external tables to relationship(database management), and make relationship? Is there any technique to make faster when dealing with ODBC source?
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.