Howe9999 Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 We have a small network with filemaker in our office. Many times the computer is left on a record that needs to be used by others. So their computer will say the record can not be modified because the same record is open on another computer. Can this safety feature be turned off or gotten around in some way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanBrill Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 No, there's no way to boot a user, at least not right away. But you can do: File > Access Priv > Passwords > Disconnect from server when idle But I'm not sure what constitutes 'idle'. Is it a minute? An hour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howe9999 Posted December 18, 2003 Author Share Posted December 18, 2003 Thanks that answered my other question this one I wasn't too clear on. If the same record is showing on two computers in the network you can not change content of any of the fields in that record until other person advances or goes to a different record so you are the only one using that record within the file. That is what I would like to get around. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Queue- Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 If you could get around it, you would be welcoming data corruption. All db systems should be designed this way. If two users are changing the same record, which one gets saved? FileMaker doesn't save the changes until a user exits the record (pushes Enter or clicks on a portion of the layout without fields), thus ensuring that an undo can be performed, if necessary, and all desired data has been entered. Then another user can access the record to make changes, but not until then. If all your scripts end with a Go to Field [ ] or Exit Record step, then informing your users to exit a record when they're done modifying it is the only other step you can take (besides booting them via the Server after a specified amount of idle time ) to reduce record locking problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Caballero Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 Dan, and other Big Spuds - What if you put a button that linked to an Exit Record/Request script on the layout? Yes, I'm sure you would soon have extremely irate users , but wouldn't that free up the record? I've never tried it, but if my current client doesn't pay up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Queue- Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 Yes, but it's just as easy to press Enter or click outside the fields. Don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Caballero Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 Yes, of course. I was thinking this would be a way to force other users out of the record in a multi-user environment. Most of my scripts do end with an exit/record request (in fact, my standard halt script has two steps: Exit Record/Request & Halt script), but I was wondering if you put this button on a layout if it would kick you ( User A) out out of edit mode even if it was pressed by User B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanBrill Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 That won't work because the exit record command is kept to the local session, or else eny time it ran everyone on the network would be kicked off the record they were looking at. You can't make it apply to a record on another computer. (Can you?) And there's no way I'm a big spud. I've been using FM and have been a member of the Forum for a little over a year now, and I'm just starting to feel comfortable answering any questions. I definitely get a lot more than I give. I just try to answer when I can since so many others have helped me so much. Its a karma thing. But thanks for the complement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Queue- Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Oh, I see what you meant now. Yeah, that's not doable as far as I'm aware. It would be a nice feature; but I'm sure it could open up a whole can of worms if a user wasn't quite done with it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanBrill Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Hey Queue, Maybe you can answer a question. Does the 'disconnect from server when idle' only apply to FileMaker Server, or will it disconnect guests from the host using FileMaker Pro in a peer-to-peer configuration? In either case, is there a way to indicate or change the length of what constitutes idle time? Thanks, Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Caballero Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 -Queue- said: Oh, I see what you meant now. Yeah, that's not doable as far as I'm aware. It would be a nice feature; but I'm sure it could open up a whole can of worms if a user wasn't quite done with it yet. Yeah...as I said, you'd soon have a bunch of irate users. Ah well, it was just me engaging in some idle wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Queue- Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 From FM Help: You can use a password privilege to keep a guest connected to FileMaker Server when the guest is idle. Because the performance of the host can be affected by the number of active connections it must maintain, in most instances FileMaker Pro guests should be configured to disconnect from the host machine when they are idle. However, in some instances, such as when a guest is also serving as a web publishing host, the guest should maintain a connection to FileMaker Server, so that users connecting to the database through a browser will be able to access the database. Well, it would appear to be only Server, but that web publishing guest exception makes me wonder. I've never used web publishing, so maybe it's nothing. In the Server preferences you can specify an amount of 'idle' time. I believe we have ours set to 5 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaRetta Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Hmmm, well something I just found out about ... it sounds great. I haven't tried it yet, but it appears to be exactly what I (and possibly you) might be looking for to decrease record locking (and hogging). It's called Timeout and can be found at: http://www.practicemaker.com/Timeout.htm I'm certainly going to give it a spin as it looks like it will do alot more than that. LaRetta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanBrill Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 There are times that I wish (God forgive me for saying it) that FileMaker was more like Microsoft. Buy out these plug-in writers, hire them at tremendous salaries, and build their stuff right into FM! We'd all be winners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanBrill Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 As for the plug in, it looks cool. But if there are only 3 users, do I really need this? It would be a lot cheaper to walk over to their desk and poke them with a sharp object. They'd let go of the record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaRetta Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Hi Dan! I guess it depends upon the number of Users and where they are located. I know networking with other databases (although not FM) and I've run into similar problems - spending time calling around to find out - but if the User has left the building, they don't answer their phone anyway. It seems that, by the time I boot one User, another one could take their place. And, when one is on a deadline (particularly something like month-end), this could be a real drag. Three computers? Yeah, I'd probably use the stick too. LaRetta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ugo DI LUCA Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Howe9999 said: If the same record is showing on two computers in the network you can not change content of any of the fields in that record until other person advances or goes to a different record so you are the only one using that record within the file. That is what I would like to get around. Thanks If the user isn't sleeping on his desk, but rather working on this record (exiting some fields as well), couldn't you have a global container or whatever alerting him that some users are "queuing" for this record.... This could require some scripting to a g_RecordKey in a Global.fp5 file by the user that needs it. I was working on this idea for an Internal Message Board that has been requested by some of my users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 How about a paused script that resumes every five minutes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
This topic is 7444 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now