Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Jarvis last won the day on April 15

Jarvis had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Jarvis

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Industry
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

FileMaker Experience

  • Skill Level
  • FM Application
    14 Advanced

Platform Environment

  • OS Platform
  • OS Version

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I have a half dozen possible plan-view conditions for cabinet boxes. The cabinets can have an exposed end, abut a wall or appliance or simply be adjacent to another cabinet. I have some standard drawings that depict these conditions. Should I store these drawings in repeating container fields on another table and call them with a calculation or I should I simply stack them on top of each other and control their visibility with a calculation? Which approach would require less data to move down from a server?
  2. I figured it out. Problem was in a match field alignment.
  3. I am trying to script completion status for each product that my cabinet shop builds. To make this happen I have created a library of possible cabinet styles. This library contains all the tasks specific to each particular cabinet style. The process starts out with creating a record in the PROJECT table, stipulating what style of cabinet it is then activating a script that imports tasks germane to that style of cabinet. The logic for this seems simple enough but I cannot get the script to properly import the tasks. No matter what style of cabinet I initially stipulate it defaults to the first style in the library. It also won't import tasks for the same style cabinet more than once. It seems like this has something to do with found sets but I don't have the horsepower to find the sets. Can anybody tell me what I am doing wrong? Bingo Board.fmp12
  4. Comment, Thank you so much for that formula! I just went out to the shop and measured a bench we have in production. I compared it with what your calculation said it should be and baddabing-baddaboom we built it just like the Filemaker says we should. You are really talented at this but I think you missed your calling. You should have been a Cabinetmaker!
  5. My cabinet shop builds window bench seating for kitchens. I am ultimately trying to determine overall projection into the room. The basic parameters are angle of the back (A), projection from the wall (B) and height to the window sill (C). What I am trying to calculate is how deep the base portion (D) would be. I am thinking this has something to do with the pythagorean theorem but my math skills are not big enough to be sure. Angle (A) is typically 10º though can vary. Is there a way to derive Dimension D from a filemaker calculation?
  6. I have a script that requires a pause for radio button input. The pause is currently set for 2.5 seconds. Is it possible to script this such that the pause stops (and the script continues to run) upon field modification?
  7. Thank you Olger. Is all I needed to hear. Is way above my paygrade.
  8. Thanks Steve. That sounds easy enough.
  9. I currently spend about $60 per month to a company that hosts my FMP 14 databases on a shared server. How complicated would this be to manage on my own? I am not interested in hosting sites for anybody else, just those for my own company. What kind of dedicated computer gear would I need to make this happen? Would I need to have a dedicated IP address? Can this be done by a rube like myself or would it be better to continue paying someone else for this work?
  10. How complicated is it to migrate solutions written under FM Pro 14 to FMP 18? Will I need to rebuild them from 14 to 15 then 15 to 16 etc?
  11. I use Filemaker Pro 14 to communicate with my cabinet shop. I host my databases on a remote server that costs me $55 per month. The total ecosystem consists of three iMacs, three iPads and an i-Phone. The iPads & iPhone are, of course, hooked to the database with FM GO. I am usually fairly slow to adopt new software and new operating systems for several reasons. For many years I was first in line for every hardware and software upgrade. Over time I accumulated a lot of software and a lot of machines. The machines were always smarter than me and the software plenty competent enough. None of the new features were compelling enough to jump ship from what I was working with. Usually an upgrade on a piece of software required an upgrade to OSX. I couldn't simply upgrade one piece of software without upgrading all of the software and sometimes this meant I needed new work stations as well. I would be happy with Filemaker 14 for the rest of my life. My CAD software is out of date but I can play it like a piano. I prefer desktop applications over cloud based solutions. I am also getting a little fatigued by everybody having their hand in my pocket for $70 a month. (The software companies seem to have concluded where price elasticity kicks in) Enough of my rant: MY QUESTION is: Is it possible to add (FM14 compatible) Filemaker Go to to additional iPads if they are accessing FM14 based solutions?
  12. Thank you to everybody for your help here. I really appreciate it. I would be curious to learn more about the results of Tony's retesting of "Hide Object When". My comprehension of the "Conditional Visibility" section of the article BCooney pointed to seems to corroborate what Fitch reported. CONDITIONAL VISIBILITY If you use the new feature to hide objects when a formula is true (Conditional Visibility), be aware that it follows the exact same rules as Conditional Formatting. It immediately reevaluates as referenced data changes and as the window is redrawn. No commit or refresh is necessary. Like Conditional Formatting, this is nice, but it can lead to a significant performance impact if there are a lot of conditionally hidden objects on the layout.
  13. I have been watching and re-watching a web seminar by Mark Richman called "Eight ways to make Filemaker databases run even faster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNRNMgs--T4&spfreload=10 The basic goal is to minimize the packets of information that need to come down from and go back up to the server. He makes the statement that "if you can see it or touch it, it invokes the data" . To this end he advocates for using more layouts with fewer objects per layout. My question has to do with how visibility factors into this. A database I am creating for my cabinet shop has a lot of graphics that are grouped together with fields. These combined objects are stacked on top of each other then made visible based on the results of a calculated field. The attached jpeg shows a couple of typical objects. Only one of these objects is visible at a time. The entire stack would probably comprise a dozen or so of these objects. If only one of the objects is visible at a time do the non-visible objects contribute overhead weight to the layout? Would my database refresh faster if each of these cross-section objects was on it's own layout?
  14. I am not sure if this question belongs in the Calculation Engine forum or the Relationship forum. This extends a question I posted earlier this week. It involves multiplying summary fields X summary fields.scope of work.fmp12scope of work.fmp12 I am developing a database for producing bid-cost estimates for my cabinet shop. I have a table that produces a graphical synopsis of the cabinets that we need to bid on. This SYNOPSIS table tracks how many doors, drawer boxes, faceframes etc are contained in each cabinet and keeps a running total of how many items are required for all the cabinets. A second table tracks labor costs for building various components. There will eventually be several tables like this for the various components we need to build. The LABOR DOOR table tracks batch size and total minutes. We use this to calculate minutes per item. One of the goals for these labor tables will be to determine what is the optimum batch size for any particular component. I would like to be able to link the data from the labor tables to the synopsis tables. I have been unable, however, to accurately calculate how much time all the doors we have sold will take. This should be a simple multiplication of Door Quantity X Average Door Minutes. The yellow field in SYNOPSIS table should read 12 Doors X 22 minutes per door = 264 minutes instead of 45. I am not sure if this is owing to a bad relationship or that I cannot somehow use Summary Fields in such an equation.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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