Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About cursulak

  • Rank
  1. I understand the comment about the viable number of columns, however the client wishes to see a training matrix with all workers and all training taken in a table. 100 is likely not going to be that big, but I do have several clients whose numbers get up into the 40's per worker. Thanks for confirming, I didn't think it was possible.
  2. I am fairly certain I can't do what I'd like in a native table view layout but thought I'd ask to clarify. What I am looking for a table view layout which will grow both vertically and horizontally based on data available. I can get the vertical growth no problem, however, horizontal is the trick. Here's the situation: Tables: Company, Employees, Training, Required courses Employees is currently setup as a join table between the other two such that I want it to list all the employees vertically, with the training they have taken. However, the company builds a list of cour
  3. Ok I did get this to work, rather unprofessionally I might add due to my rush and time constraints. However... I found I couldn't use scgetcontainer to create a relative url (after setting base url). Instead just pulled the string as text. Doing this gave me the string which I could then apply some formulas to to remove the filename=" and the trailing ". Given that I was able to complete the cycling script to perform what the SC functions would normally do all contained. Try doing this if you've having troubles with the file name issue in FM 13 and SC.
  4. I installed both the server side and client plugins from the 2.89 download. I have a number of things curious. Supercontainer doesn't seem to play nice with a dual machine install (it's wants the web server on the same machine is the server install package) moving it to the second worker machine seems to cause grief. The SC package also looks for Java 6.x whereas I've got 7.45 installed. This could potentially be a problem, still looking deeper into that one.
  5. I am having this same result (or pretty similar) as we migrate an older server to Mavericks, FM 13 Server install. Machine is an xServer running Mavericks, Filemaker 13.0.1 installed, deployed as a 2 machine install, Supercontainer 2.89 had to be manually installed on the server as the install script would not run in mavericks. I suspect there is a 32 bit issue here. Filenames for me look like "filename=_actualfilename.pdf_ Oddly enough the file sizes match like it is exporting the data, but the file is totally unusable, and unrecognizable. This is important for me to find a fix
  6. I can do that. It would probably be easier and faster to do screen sharing right on the server so that you can see source logs and browser response at the same time. Log files I can email you directly now. As for supercontainer yes I will do that, the clients have the latest but the server hasn't been updated in a bit. I am at the office near the server today (19jul11) if today works. I will give you a call. chris
  7. I am having trouble with this plugin as well, however I have no error at all. I can browse the log files, users connected, but the orange file icon returns no open databases at all. WIth no errors, however there are several open (8). All other functions seem to be ok. Here's what I've got: OS X Server Leopard running on Xserve with Xraid attached through fibre. FM server 10.0v2 Updated recently released Java update (so fmadmin runs again - yeah!) adminanywhere version 1.4 licensed version also running supercontainer plugin 2.631 Any thoughts on the setup which mig
  8. Yeah, that has come up several times, we're laughing over the different possibilities for a sub-clause ;-) I've been fiddling with calc's of different sorts to generate a list of what's in the various tables. and then drop that calc field in a portal to display the listings and make them GRR. I can get a cascading portal to do it for me, but not in a single listing... i was hoping that's all.
  9. I have done that in the past and here's why I'm trying to get away from it. Each section can have a "fairly large" text block with it such that 2 (1) (a) (i) there will be a large block at 2, another subsection 1 and another at claus a...etc. When this is all in one flat table it makes it more difficult to compile reports layered properly with the sections combined and fit it on a 13 page limit output. With this method I could use the body section and have an almost limitless report length. 13 pages sounds like a lot of room until lawyers get involved... and then you find
  10. Here is something I'm trying to do which I've found out is beyond my ability to figure out today. I am creating a database to hold government acts and regulations for quick lookup. I have attached a copy of the joins. I added the extra ID's being carried through because a duplicate number problem across regs and acts and this solved it and kept them easier to track. However... What I want to do is have only layout with a portal in it that lists the acts and regs by number so that I could just click on it and it would should show below the portal. For example Regs are by type
  11. ok thanks for that. Could I have essentially ?style=readonly become ?style=accesscalc where the accesscalc is a calculation looking at my lock field. When the lock field is on and evaluates true, the text readonly becomes the field (probably using case), other is just ""? This way it can be a calc and not have to be part of a script?
  12. I've setup security in my database such that if a lock field is set, several things happen. Script triggers will verify from the field either allowing or disallowing events, and user privileage set is affected by it not allowing certain classes of users to edit or change the record (essentially everyone except admin). However, this doesn't work for supercontainers on that same layout. I have successfully been able to lock the layout and all portals from it... but not supercontainers. Can this be accomplished where if a field evaluates true, supercontainer does not allow changes but
  13. I looked at the LockParent example uploaded. Thanks very much for that. Simple, elegant and functional. I think this may be just how I will accomplish this. Pushing all my clients to version 10 so I can use the script trigger as well is acceptable to me (on many different levels). Thanks again, you've all been a big help.
  14. Thanks for that everyone. I understand the layout trigger as you described it. Still a lot of work for all the layouts but of course doable. I'll check out this posted file this morning. Thanks again for everyone's suggestions, it's bumped me along the road to a solution fairly quickly.
  15. I'd have to have a hidden tab on the same layout I think to do that such that when the record is locked it causes the second tab to be the foremost (with the user never realizing the other tab is behind and can't get to it). I'm not sure how to make mulitple layouts work when the locked record would appear in both essentially. In my own real example, I'm talking about 46 layouts and 70 or so relationships...so I'm trying to keep my working model to something I can handle. Great suggestion but I was hoping for something like a formula that could affect the relationship itself pos
  • Create New...

Important Information

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