When making a relationship where all records relate to all records, is it better to use a calculation field that always equals "1", or a global field that you set to "1" for both databases.

When you create the relationship with globals, FM says it won't work, but it seems to work fine for the purpose of getting data in global fields from one db to another.

I use a calculated field in the parent file so that it's harder for a user to accidently change the value. In the related file, it must be a calculated field so that it can be indexed.

In the related file, it must be a calculated field so that it can be indexed.

Like I said, when you relate with two globals, FM says it won't work because the field cannot be indexed, but then it seems to work just fine for passing variables in globals around... just kinda surprised me.

This was just an experimental database I was creating, I'm not actually using this... when I looked back in a past project I realized that you don't even need an all to all relationship to pass globals. Even if the record has no related records, it can still pass globals to and from the related file... kewl.

I usually use a global field in the Parent table, and a text field (indexable) in the child table. I just make sure the Child key field auto-enters the correct data upon record creation.

just make sure the Child key field auto-enters the correct data upon record creation.

or you could just use a calculation field and make it always =1

I use calculated fields, since that way you can ALWAYS relate in either direction without needing to worry about having the necessary calcs and globals. They are already there.

To add to the others, I use a calc that =1.

As well, I always use a template that already has a that calc in it so I never use a global.