Hi there...

In answer to This thread , this sampler shows how Relationships can be "nested" to narrow a "search" built on multiple criterias.

This thread had somehow moved to Caf

Ugo DI LUCA said:

This cloned sampler includes an "Auto-Random Record Generator", so that you can automatically create from 500 to 20000 parents and their numerous others affiliate.

Hi Ugo , Where I can get this sample?

Oops...

Robert, this wasn't the main purpose of the sample, but true you are...

What an idiot I am.

Here's attached the demo files.

Be aware. 5,000 records, which I recommand you start with will take about 4/5 minutes to generate either Parents and Children....

Multi-relatedfinds.zip

Thanks Ugo, That should answer my friends question of last week.

I don't think you are an Idiot. I think you are pretty smart.

Therefore maybe you can reconsider and call yourself

forgetful or Sinile, But not an Idiot. ;-)

Ok, Sinile then

This file will be updated soon to allow multiple criterias to be entered in combination with one request. At the moment, the Main Request only allows multiple values for the Month, but it should be possible to input more than one querry per "Request", then have these additional 3 requests to narrow the Find.

Say I want to find those Parents who have children :

1. Male, Brown Eye, Red Hair, born Feb-Mar or Apr OR Blue Eye, Red Hair, born Feb-Mar

2. Which also have another Child Blond

3. Which don't have any Child borned in May

This will be solved by Dj's loop solution to my querry about counters and loop , which for those who didn't already have seen it, is a *Must* see.

Thanks for the good words though...

Ugo, there is a very clever method of doing related finds like this in the Moyer and Bowers book. It uses an interesting characteristic of repeating fields that allows it to perform an AND type of find when used in a related field.

I modified your example to use this method and attached it here. This is very simplified and doesn't allow 'exclude' type finds like your original file does. But I thought that the technique would be interesting to see anyway.

RelatedFinds.zip

Hi Bob,

actually you could even define original fields as repeated (and use them just like standard fields) without any overhead.

Dj

Thanks both of you.

Actually, even before posting this sampler, I had in mind another solution which, from what I tested it, would be even more reliable and dynamic. So far, the results are *very* promising. I just need some more time to fix it and post, not before the middle of next week.

IMO, this technique, which I never saw applied before, is so dynamic that I'd like to share opinions on this on another thread :

A Find Revolution ?

A big thank you to Dj who without knowing, drived me step by step through this.

Thanks for any comments or suggestions again.

Dj,

I used non-repeating for the regular data fields since they needed to be combined into a calculated search field anyway in order to have the AND search work accross all fields. Maybe there is a simpler way, but this was the only way I could get it to work when searching on any combination of 4 fields.