Jump to content
Claris Engage 2025 - March 25-26 Austin Texas ×
The Claris Museum: The Vault of FileMaker Antiquities at Claris Engage 2025! ×

ERD wrong for Filemaker 7?


This topic is 6979 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

Posted

In Case Studio 2.22 I made an ERD as can be seen on Link. When I made the same diagram in Filemaker 7, Filemaker doesn't accept the making of relationship 5. Does it have to do with the 'circle' I'm creating in ERD or is there something else wrong? Case studio allows me to make this ERD...

Kensje

Posted

When I made the same diagram in Filemaker 7

The relationship graph shown in filemaker isn't a ERD - I'm afraid but instead a graphic linking of TO (table occurences)

Try to read this: http://www.filemaker.com/downloads/pdf/techbrief_fm7_foundations.pdf

--sd

Posted

Yep, you can only have one path between table occurances.

Remember though that the FM relationships graph is *not* an ERD tool. A true ERD will only show tables. The FM graph does not show tables but table occurances. It's an important concept that is very well described in the mega migration tech brief.

Posted

Hi Sd,

Thanks for your reply. So when I want to realize the ERD I made, I have to make each table in the ERD in a new file or do I miss the point here...

Posted

The Relationship Graph is NOT an E-R Diagram. You are looking at Table Occurances, TO's for short. You can not have a circular path in the graph so you use another TO not another table.

  • Newbies
Posted

Thanks Sd for your advise. I found a rather interesting URL which explains the pros and cons of TO ands TOG's: Link

Regards,

Jan-Kees Kense

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Well, the notion of pros and cons isn't valid. You don't have any choice - that's how FileMaker 7+ works. But it is helpful to understand how the concept works and the variations you can use in carrying it out.

Posted

the notion of pros and cons isn't valid

No correct - it's more the degree of utilization of the tools at hand. One thing from the whitepaper says this quite well.

Whether a complex project turns out good, bad or very ugly depends largely upon the skillful use of table occurrence groups.

...and yes it's too bad that just can't buy yet another blackbox'ish gadget, but instead have to work yourself towards the gist of topic, and not "the one who dies with most toys wins"

--sd

This topic is 6979 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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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