list check and submit all

[rivet]

I have a found set of records that I would like to put a check mark in the column received for some or all of the records. Is it possible to process multiple records like that and if so how?

[Garry Claridge]

If they are in a 'Portal' you may be able to edit more than one.

All the best.

Garry

[Keith M. Davie]

By performing a script event you can use the Replace to insert your "check mark" in a found set of records. Of course you must construct the script event so that it runs safely in a browser solution.

[Anatoli]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keith M. Davie:

By performing a script event you can use the Replace to insert your "check mark" in a found set of records. Of course you must construct the script event so that it runs safely in a browser solution.

---

How do you do that? What if there is delay (1sec or 1 minute) and the found set belongs to someone else?

That is really funny

Keith still didn't get the idea on many web users doing all sort of things with the database in same time

[Keith M. Davie]

"What if there is delay (1sec or 1 minute) and the found set belongs to someone else?"

Before I respond to one second let me respond to one minute. There is no logical or stylistic reason for a script event or any other database event to take one minute to complete in a browser solution which is open to the public. If the event takes that long it will not work. It should be redesigned. (Or run on a system like eBay's.)

If the event which is to be used in a browser solution takes one second to complete there is probably a better way to design the solution. But that answer evades the "What if..." part of your question. With my workaround to the problem with ScriptMaker in a browser solution (which can be on the www) the near-simultaneous call issue ("what if") is resolved. The second (third, fourth, or more) near-simultaneous requester is advised to run the script again, though not necessarily in those terms. Quite frankly, this resubmission technique is used successfully at other websites I have visited (non-FMPro).

"...and the found set belongs to someone else?"

1. Bzzzzzt - NOT. A browser solution is stateless and the browser is not in constant contact with the database. A browser client may "own the found set" only for the duration of the script event which finds and edits it (which ownership is protected in my workaround). A developer should understand and know how to take advantage of the stateless nature of the browser.

2. Why allow more than one person to edit with different data the same field of the same record such that the edits occur near simultaneously? There is "something funny".

Not that it cannot be solved with a design based on knowing exactly what is desired and using all the tools available. But to accomplish that you must know how the ScriptMaker tool can work for you in this situation in order to use it properly. And you must be a creative designer (oops, developer).

By knowing what exactly is required, it may prove that a script is inappropriate for this solution. But if a script is THE answer and you don't know how to use the ScriptMaker tool in conjunction with cdml to get that answer then you are limited in your abilities. And one must remember that the solution may depend on whether you are using version 4.0 or 5.0, since fewer tools are available in 4.0. I cannot speak directly to version 5.5 re: my workaround as I have not tried that. But ScriptMaker is single-threaded in 5.5, and 5.5's cdml does not recognize an event which is not completed successfully as something which should generate an error format file, just like 4.0 and 5.0.

Perhaps the starting point for those facing a multiple-record-same-field-edit should be, "How would I handle this as a peer-to-peer solution?". Similarly one is often well advised to ask, "Is a near-simultaneous multiple-record-same-field-edit what I really need (not want) to accomplish?"

"Keith still didn't get the idea..."

Keith has more ideas than you may realize, and a modicum of understanding as well. And he does know how to run ScriptMaker scripts successfully in a browser solution. ;-)

[ April 12, 2002, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: Keith M. Davie ]

[Anatoli]

Keith is blind and I am sorry for this.

RE: "...and the found set belongs to someone else?"

Did you ever watch FM serving web under 10 requests per second? It is so fluid and the found sets in FM are constantly changed so you cannot apply anything to them with any mechanism available

I never saw anybody so shortsighted in my long life. It is like "earth is center of the universe theory". You can develop logical theories based on that fact and all will be wrong.

FM is not storing any found sets. Peroid. So you cannot relate and apply something to them later -- 1 sec or 1 year, it is the same.

[Keith M. Davie]

Anatoli, responding to my remarks to his statement (RE: "...and the found set belongs to someone else?" ) wrote, "FM is not storing any found sets. Peroid. So you cannot relate and apply something to them later -- 1 sec or 1 year, it is the same."

My remarks to that paranthetical quote began, "1. Bzzzzzt - NOT. A browser solution is stateless and the browser is not in constant contact with the database." It should be clear from that statement that I understand that "FM is not storing any found sets."

When Anatoli writes, "So you cannot relate and apply something to them later...", he is missing what is found in the very next sentence of my remarks, "A browser client may "own the found set" only for the duration of the script event which finds and edits it (which ownership is protected in my workaround)."

The finding and editing of the set are all part of the same script event. There is no "later". When the script event is completed the edit of the found set is completed. That data reflecting the edits can, if desired, be displayed in the resulting format file.

"It is really quite simple", said the blind carpenter as he picked up his hammer and saw.

Again, I thank Anatoli for his questions and comments which allow me the opportunity to expand upon the beauty of running ScriptMaker successfully in a browser soluiton. Anatoli asks good questions.

[Anatoli]

Keith doesn't see the woods through trees

I give up, it is pointless

[Keith M. Davie]

Oh Anatoli, don't give up. This is not pointless. These are good things we are discussing.

I want to know how the found set can belong to someone else in a browser (stateless) solution.

Or are you perhaps talking about a browser solution which has been incorporated into a peer-to-peer solution, and that someone on the peer-to-peer connection has record-locking in effect?

You see, we could be talking about two different things. This needs to be made clear.

[ April 14, 2002, 07:28 PM: Message edited by: Keith M. Davie ]