Data Updating Issue

[mattz]

I'm not sure if this is the right forum to be posting this, but I'm having a problem with data getting back to the server quickly. When in a database updating a part number, if you click on Back to Order, the information doesn't change unless you leave the order and go back. We need it to update automatically.

Also, when putting in a Reference Part Number, it wouldn't let you put in a part unless the word REV was in it. There's a formula in place to make that happen, but it seems to have stopped working. I didn't actually design all of this, so I am kind of lost.

Any help would be great!!

Thanks,

-Matt

[bcooney]

I'd call the developer if you can. Sounds like script issues that would require revisions.

[mattz]

That's the problem...I actually can't get a hold of the guy...

-Matt

[bcooney]

Well, if you have the design master password then just hire a new developer. The forum could walk you thru a bit, but you really need one person focusing on this, imho.

[mattz]

So you think that the data not updating right away is an issue with the database and not the software? I'm using FM9 for the "server" side and FM8 for the clients...I don't know if it's a problem due to not having the actual Server program or if it is something else...

-Matt

[bcooney]

Yes, I'd say it's not a FM issue, but rather a poorly constructed portal, commit issue, refresh issue. Anyone of the above.

It strikes me as odd that you leave an order to update a part number. What's up with that?

[Søren Dyhr]

I'm with Barbara here, it's the developers fault, which oftentimes however stems from a slight change in premisses, you need to consider filemaker in a different light:

http://www.proofgroup.com/articles/2006/jun/filemakery_part_i

...although it's the lifeblood of a vast herd of users of this forum to produce foilwrapped solutions with this tool, should the groupware metaphor not be neglected.

This means from the users perspective, that everyone in the group ideally should have a say when things get inconvenient or outdated, and then ....by common efford in the group make the solution abide to changes in business rules, without calling soneone from the outside with secretly kept access to the inner workings of the solution.

IMHO is there some more obvious tools to use, if the aim is to produce proprietary software, such as Runtime Revolution, with a MySQL backbone comes to mind. There is obviously much more trouble to adjust to changes in circumstances with this kind of software, or if the mission-statement for the solution originally have been too vaguely defined.

Filemaker really shines, when adjustability is an objective! Just as guerilla troopers makes a lousy performance in parades, they're drilled differently, since it about tactics in their case!

--sd

[mattz]

This database was designed in FM 5...I think that might be part of the problem. It's old, outdated, and probably full of problems. It would be extremely hard for me to update the whole thing because I'm really a novice when it comes to Filemaker. I am learning a lot, but I know there's tons more to learn.

We have a database for our Part Numbers. In it, are the Reference Numbers, Material Part Numbers for each finished part, Description of the part, history of sales on the part, etc. In order to edit this info from the Order screen, you have to click on "View Part Info" and it takes you to the Part Numbers Database. Is this a bad way of doing things??

-Matt

[bcooney]

I can't answer whether this functionality makes sense from here. It just strikes me that if you are focusing on creating an order--why would you go off and edit a part? I can see a View Part Info, but it wouldn't lead to such a diversion of purpose.

Why not go to the FileMaker website and get hold of a local developer? Ask for an estimate for upgrading/converting to FM9.

[Søren Dyhr]

No that's a pretty common approach, except that such matters usually reside inside the one and same database today, where multiple tables per database is facilitated.

But using this as a matter to sue the original developer, for not having enough prophet'ing applied.

Could it be said, no-one can really guess in what direction the next upgrades of filemaker is going to reveal of options and changes in behaviour. There have been a radical change in approaches with filemaker 7 ... which unfortunately makes it tough for a layman to migrate his/her solution, without reading this properly:

http://www.filemaker.com/downloads/pdf/techbrief_fm8_migrtn_found.pdf

--sd

[mattz]

I just wonder if going to a totally new updated database is going to cause a loss of information. I don't think the boss will take to this idea...

ugh...

[bcooney]

Of course not. Rewrite, test in parallel and then data conversion. This is, admittingly, not trivial.

[Søren Dyhr]

I don't think the boss will take to this idea.

Who suggested the upgrade?? We all make decisions loosely founded, when vanity dictates something should be fixed when it's not broken, is there only one to blame, the persuader!

--sd