sgonzo

In playing around with this, I think I discovered something. The change to number from calc doesn't seem to work when you use a self join, and the calculation uses a field from the "child" table occurrence. It does seem to work when you use only a field from the parent table in the calculation. But here the weird part. If I have a calc, say the calcfield = numberfield / 3. If I have a second table occurrence already set up, and then I change calcfield to a number from a calc, I will get <Index if i place the field from the child table occurrence. However, if i change the field to number, and then create the 2nd table occurrence, i can get the number to properly appear in the child table occurrence field. So the logic of the program seems to require a specific sequence of events, or to say it another way the relationship at the time the child table is created seem to define function, and later changes to the parent table aren't recognized? Or perhaps there's a way to force a readjustment in the child. It may all be different if it isn't a self-join. Anyway, I hope my rambling helps someone.

Neither of these worked for me, but I think it's because my calculation references related fields. If(RelatedTableOccurrence:total > (thistable)sum; 1; 0) The 1 goes away with changing to number, or changing to number with auto-enter calculation using do not change values. I guess this is a little much to expect the program to do.

I need to make a calculation only once when I import records. After that, I want to keep the calculated values and use them for Finds, so I would like to change the calculated field into an unmodifiable number field that is indexed. Is there a simple trick to convert calculations to values? I can do it with a script, (copy the information to another field for each record), but wonder if there is a simple trick to do it faster. Thanks for any help.

I'm pretty new to this, but I think you could make a summary field, that gives a count of Zip code. Then place this field in a subsummary part when sorted by zip code, and then look at it in preview mode.

Your first sentence cleared my thinking completely. Also, thanks for the suggestion on the last function. I'm rolling again!

I have 5 fields: group (number), record_number(calc, Get(recordnumber), record_number_max (summary, max of record_number) rec_num_getsummary (calc, getsummary(record_number_max; group) highest_record_number_flag (calc as text, if(rec_num_getsummary = record_number; "X", "") I want to get an x in highest_record_number_flag when I have the maximum record number in each group. This works fine. However, when I try to find only these record, by placing a search on X in the highest_record_number_flag, or searching on non-blank with * in this field, I get the message "No records match this set of find requests." Do I have another misunderstanding? Can I not do a find in this field? Do I need to also place a criteria in an indexed field? Thanks for any advice.

I don't really understand why you're insulting me. Your answers may seem clear to you, but perhaps you could have empathy for someone new to the program. I'm just trying to figure out how to do something slightly complex, and I admit I'm not well versed in the program. If you applied the energy spent on insults and sarcasm, and created a clearer explanation, maybe I wouldn't aggravate you so much that you feel the need to belittle. I don't see the attachment on your earlier post, but then that's the definition of a student of something, they don't know everything yet.

Not to offend the forum, but can you suggest a database to use? I'm experimenting with the trial version of filemaker to see if it can do what I need. I was churning a whole lot of data using excel macros and applescripts, and thought that it's time for it to all go in a database. I must say that even though I've read the user manual and a (not very good) book on Filemaker, the logic of the program still hasn't clicked for me. Of all the programs I've ever learned, this has taken the most time without a feeling of understanding. It seems that a lot of the design is pointing fields back at themselves and then filtering, but then I really don't get it so my judgement is biased.

This is a vastly simplified version of some data collected by a scientific experiment. The experiment groups things, and I need to give them some averages of high groupings. So the data looks like this: record 1: 1 1 1 record 2: 1 1 2 record 3: 1 1 3 record4: 1 2 1 record5: 1 2 2 record6: 1 2 3 record7: 1 2 3 record8; 1 2 4 record9; 1 3 1 record10: 1 3 2 record11: 1 3 2 record11: 1 3 2 record12: 1 3 2 (record13:) 2 1 1 etc. so for every change in the middle number field (group) I want to know the highest number the right number field (subgroup) got to. When I've gotten all that, I want to know the average of all those highest numbers for all of the numberfield on the left (supergroup).

I need this spelled out in a little more detail. I set up a self join table, so supergroup = supergroup, group = group, and subgroup = subgroup. (or is it some other relation comparator?) How do i get the maximum subgroup number from this? Do I need to set another field to be Max_Number_of_Subgroup and self-join that to subgroup? If so, how do I restrict this so that I don't get the maximum subgroup across all groups? Pretend I'm real stupid, and give me all the details (actually, you might not have to pretend that I'm stupid). Thanks.

Here's some data: supergroup1 group1 subgroup1 supergroup1 group1 subgroup2 supergroup1 group1 subgroup3 supergroup1 group2 subgroup1 supergroup1 group2 subgroup2 supergroup1 group2 subgroup3 supergroup1 group2 subgroup3 supergroup1 group2 subgroup4 supergroup1 group3 subgroup1 supergroup1 group3 subgroup2 supergroup1 group3 subgroup2 supergroup1 group3 subgroup2 so i want to know that max subgroup within group1 is 3, within group2 is 4, within group 3 is 2. So 3 + 4 + 2 = 9 divided by 3 groups = average highest subgroup is 3 for all of supergroup1 i can make a self join table with these fields equal to themselves, but I don't understand the sub summary calc field based on that. Do I make a summary field, or a calc field? The logic of Filemaker still eludes me.

I have fields: Supergroup, Group, Subgroup, otherfields I need to extract one max Subgroup number for each Group, sum these highest Subgroup numbers, and divide this sum by the max number for Group. In other words, I need the average of the highest Subgroup number in each Group across the whole Supergroup. I can get the Subgroup high number in a subsummary for Group, but how do I get the average all these subsummaries maximums for each Supergroup? Thanks for any assistance.

The light bulb over my head is now illuminated! Thanks.

Excuse me for being dense. I have three fields, Subject, Number_One and Number_Two. I want the max for these two number fields summaries at each change in subject. So I created two summary fields Summary_One, Summary_Two, each set as Max of those number fields. When I place these two fields in my subsummary by Subject, I get correct numbers. Then I tried adding them with another calculation field Added_Number = Summary_One + Summary_Two. However, when I place this field in the subsummary, it do not get what I expect. I get a much larger number, the source of which I haven't found yet. Please let me know my fundamental misunderstanding about subsummary and a calculation field based on summary fields. Thanks again. Just when I think I've figured out this program, I find something that doesn't make sense to me.

Thanks. It's great that you experts are so patient with us novices. This forum has given me insight into how to think about Filemaker. Of all the programs I've used, this one has taken the longest to get a grasp on the logic, as data and design are meshed. Sort wrong and you've got the wrong answers.