Kevin Wertz

I'm wondering if Server 5.5 and 7 Advanced can reside on the same machine. We bought S7A for now, to host Cleveland Consulting's Multi-user Calendar, and it will eventually host our upgraded maintenance management system. In the meantime, our maintenance system is still in V6 hosted by Server 5.5. The server in question is a brand new server with some very beefy specs. The multi user calendar is not a huge system and would have at most 20 concurrent users over IWP. But Server 5.5 would be hosting up to 80 concurrent users.

Hi all, again I apologize for posting DevCon issues in this forum. I have suggested to the admin that he create a DevCon forum. If there is one and I'm not finding it, please let me know. Anyway, it turns out there's another resort adjacent to the Desert Ridge, called the Marriott Canyon Villas. I was told by someone at the resort that it's about 10 minute walking distance from the conference rooms. But if you don't want to walk, a shuttle bus runs on a regular schedule between the two resorts, so between walking or riding the shuttle bus, renting a car would not be necessary if staying at this resort. Note that people who stay at the Canyon Villas get full use of the Desert Ridge amenities. It's King Bed (I think the Filemaker rate rooms in the main hotel are double beds), refrigerator and microwave included, and then with all of the other typical hotel room stuff. The nice part is that the reservation I'm holding is for only $99 per night. Since my company is paying for it, I'd rather just stay in the main hotel, but perhaps someone who'd like to save $120 over the four nights and still be close to the conference rooms might be interested. You can see this resort at http://marriott.com/property/propertyPage/PHXCV . It looks pretty nice. Would anyone who currently has a room reserved at the Desert Ridge like to trade? As of a few minutes ago I'm showing no more rooms in the Canyon Villas available for that time period. Email me at kevin.wertz.b@bayer.com if you are interested. Thanks.

MRT, what about v7's instant web publishing? The basic Filemaker Pro 7, without server, allows 5 or 10 concurrent users (can't remember which) for no additional cost. If your application isn't too complex nor requires more than 5 or 10 concurrent users, this would be a great option and would not require all the users to buy a copy of FMP. I really like the instant web publishing in v7. It has some quirks, but it's pretty slick IMHO.

Welcome to Filemaker. I hope you find it the ideal technology replacement for your Paradox system. The way you would do that is to create a separate calculation field out of the label. Basically the field's calculation would be: if (isempty(btel)=0, "Business Tel",""). Translated literally, "if business telephone number field is not empty, then show the label "Business Tel", otherwise show nothing." Now this would not be ideal if you had a lot of fields that you wanted to do this with, you'd have a heck of a lot of fields after a while. Hope this answers your question.

Sorry to post this here, but I couldn't find an appropriate thread. If you had a room reserved at the hotel for Devcon, and now you want to cancel, please let me know so I can get your room. I registered late for DevCon and now the hotel is full.

No, note above that I mentioned that I changed my table occurence to read from the workorder table of the back end file. This of course in turn changed all the layouts to be tied to the new back end table instead of the local table. I renamed the backend file's table to Workorder_tbl so I could make sure that I would not get confused between the two.

Okay, to begin rebuilding my relatively large system (40+ files) I decided to start with the main hub of the system, the workorder file. So, wanting to separate my data from my front end, I made two copies of the file, one to be the front end and one to be the back end. In the front end, I was able to repoint the layouts to look at the table in the back end instead of the local table by just changing the table occurence. So now, all my layouts are now updated to look at the back end file, and since the field names are the same, it all works great. HOWEVER, when I deleted the local workorder table (didn't need it anymore!), it deleted all my fields off of my layouts even though they were now pointing to the new back end file. Even when I renamed a field in the local workorder table and then deleted it, it still deleted that field off the layout. So I started over. The only workaround I found to fix this, and I tried this with a field that only showed on two layouts, was to open two windows of the file, put the layouts in layout mode, move something one pixel and then back, then delete the field in the local workorder table. It would delete it off the layout, but then when I exit the layout, I don't save the changes and voila, the field is back. This is an okay workaround, but this file has 62 layouts! Can I even open 62 different windows of the same file? And this is too time consuming. Does anyone know of any way to keep this from happening?

I am redesigning a v6 system in v7. One of the nice things about v7 is how much easier they made it to separate the front-end from the back-end. So this is what I want to do. The reason I need to do this system this way is that we are unable to make changes to the live system as it is a validated, FDA compliant system. Whenever we do a change to the system we have to go through change control. The code changes have to be made on a backup of the files, then, when the changes are tested and approved, we have to migrate the production data into the new files then prove that all the data migrated correctly. It is a royal pain in the you know what. So I said all that to say this...I really need to move everything out of the back-end as much as possible, so that when we go through change control, all I have to do is replace the front end file with the changes. So, I would like to set up the relationships in the front-end file. Will this work?

Say it ain't so. I must have majorly misunderstood what they meant by external server authentication. It looks like, and tell me if I'm wrong, that external server authentication is only for verifying access to the file and assigning the privilege set? The main thing I wanted, and thought we were getting, was for my users to be able to log in using their Windows domain username and password.

I must have missed something here. Do I understand correctly that external server authentication is only for verifying access to the file and assigning the privilege set? The main thing I wanted, and thought we were getting, was for my users to be able to log in using their domain username and password.

I'm having the same problem. I'm on a Windows 2000 laptop. But my value lists are sometimes taking 3-5 seconds whereas in v6 they were pretty much instantaneous. I reported the issue to my Filemaker rep who passed it on.

Did you ever get this taken care of?

Hey Stu, I noticed that it takes a value list 3 to 5 seconds or more to pop up in my converted solution. I thought maybe if I moved the value list table into the file that is displaying the value list that it would improve. It didn't. Anyone have any explanation for this?