Not asked before?? Humm...

[rayh34]

Yes, I just bought the "Using Filemaker 8" book, and will read the relationship section. But, in general just wanted to know if this is possible since me and a co-work dissagree. 3 different tables/records totally unrelated.

1. Inventory

2. Customer Contacts

3. Employee Time cards

BTW, The inventory has nothing to with the customer contacts.

I can made 3 different FM databases for these without a problem, but would really like to have one db with different layouts. But cant figure out a relationship to make them work. Having tons of global fields does"nt seem right. Not looking for specific answers...

[Genx]

... Why would there need to be a relationship and what do global fields have to do with anything? Not all the data within a file HAS to relate... Especially if it's on different layouts.

Could you rephrase the question if i'm not understanding (which i'm probably not)

[rayh34]

Because I would like all 3 to be in same group of layouts. I would like for the end user to only have to open 1 database with tabs for each. But, you can't display data in second tab/layout without there being some relation to default db. Globals, because I can call a global field with out it being related, and I am sure that it's not you with the missunderstanding! I am just seeing if there is a way to consolidate 3 different files into a central layout. And yes, I would like to win the lottery too!!

[Genx]

But, you can't display data in second tab/layout without there being some relation to default db.

You're going to have to straighten out your terminology.

RE: Files vs. Tables, and Tabs vs. Layouts -- Please explain what these mean to you in the way you are using them.

If you want the data on two different Layouts, the fact that the data has no relationship what so ever will NOT affect it's ability to be stored in the same file... Layouts are based on table occurances..

Also, why you would want to put ALL the information on one layout especially when it doesn't relate, I'm not sure.

[rayh34]

Humm.. File to me is a group of records, as is tables but with the exception of being a subset of records within the same db. To test the theory I constructed a db with all the Contact manager records being displayed on tab A.(Not sure if Tabs and layouts work diff). Then added a table with all the inventory records. Tried to diplay those records on Tab B. Got the usuall "unrelated table error". The only reason to have all the info displayed in one FM file, is that the end user is required to work constantly with the data from each. Kinda of a partial small business solution.

[rayh34]

Might have just answered my own question, I was assuming that the new tab function in version 8 was a shortcut to nav to different layouts. Instead of having to create graphics to look like your tabbing..

[Genx]

: That's right tab's are just way's of putting more related data on ONE layout, vs putting related or unrelated data on multiple layouts.

[rayh34]

Thanks for the sounding board. Now you understand why they dont let me play with sharp objects. :

[Genx]

Hey don't be embarrassed... if you search around and look hard you'll find some posts made by me from 1.5 years ago.. HA! Now those were funny. Lol, as for the sharp objects LOL!!!!

[David Jondreau]

In answer to your question...

Yes it's possible. Look for the 'x' relationship operator. It will relate all records in one table to all records in another regardless of what's in the match fields. It's called a Cartesian relationship.

From what you've described...this might be what you need.

G

[Genx]

.. but not necessarily a good idea..

Your records would still be based on the Table Occurance that your layout is based on.. which means you only ever have access to ONE record in your "related table" and no matter what you do in your primary table, you only ever have access to the one "related" record... The cartesian product relationship does have it's uses but i highly doubt this is in anyway a recommended one.

Just because you CAN jump off a building, doesn't necessarily mean you should...