Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
onthebass

SDK bind failures and deleted records

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

I've got a couple of issues going on that may or may not be related.

The first is I had a solution that I built in FMP 6 and then I converted it to FM 8.5 which was a real pain. No, I did not put all the files into one file with multiple tables like I should have because I just didn't have the time--I am now really regretting it. Anyway, regardless of the stucture, the files should work the same. I read all the white papers and made all the neccesary changes... I think.

When I tried to bind the solution on the PC at least half the time there was something faulty about the bind, mainly the SDK did not perform as expected. I can't tell you exactly what was occuring because it was a number of months ago, but after I binded the solution again it seemed to work okay.

This leads to the second MAJOR problem: Deleted Records. I have had a client using the FM 6.0 solution (not SDK) for the past 5 years without any problems, and now I have a new client on the 8.5 SDK solution and they are reporting hundreds of deleted records. I've been programming FM for the last 10 years, so I thought User Error of course, Filemaker does not lose records. I checked the files and there is no way they could have deleted the records in that particular hidden related file. I double and triple checked all my work and I can't find the issue.

The first thing I had the client check was if there was another version of the app still on the computer and he confirmed that there was not. I even tried running multiple copies on my computer and the SDK won't even open up the second set if you already have a version open.

So my question is has anyone had any binding issues with the SDK in FM 8.5?

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think it's the binding of the file as such, but instead a too careless use of cascaded deletes which by fm7 suddenly are bidirectional.

If you anchor buoy your graph will you have a good measure to catch such matters, since it diliberatly ignores that the bidirectiality actually is posible by discriping dependencies more rigidly.

http://www.filemaker.com/downloads/pdf/FMDev_ConvNov05.pdf

--sd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Soren,

Thanks for weighing in on this one. I always value your opinion.

Are you basically saying that perhaps one of my relationships is set up in a way that if I am not careful to make sure that my

"Delete related records in this table when a record is deleted in the other table"

check boxes are not unchecked then I could be deleting something down the relationship line?

I rarely allow this sort of record deletion in my solutions. In this particular case it is a simple single relationship between a parent and child. No complicated relationship lines.

I've attached the schema. The parent is Patients.fp7 and the children are held in Addresses.fp7 a seperate file. It is the children that have disappeared totally.

Thanks!

AddressRelationship.gif

Schema.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the children that have disappeared totally

Yes thats what I'm saying! Couldn't it sound like such a thing??

The parent is Patients.fp7 and the children are held in Addresses.fp7 a seperate file. It is the children that have disappeared totally

This must be because, the solution meant for general a practician, to have just one record for an entire household or how many of the patiens have several residences, and does it really matter in doctor patients base??

One thing that occured to me now, could have been a backup which reinstate a missing file, I could perhaps understand some use of the separation model, but splitting the addresses out in one single file is beyond me??

I have yet another thing, what about typemismatch in the keyfields, if you have a cascaded deletion set on will some weird results once and a while occure. Do you pre- or postfix your relaional keys??

BTW get rid of the constants, use cartesian relations instead, and to clear up the graph by deleting the keyfields after making the connection.

--sd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

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