Any secret to Matching Names import option?

[K1200]

Using the two-file separation model, I occasionally import all the contents of the data file into a sightly-modified structure. This month, I've re-encountered an import problem that has plagued me since I started using FileMaker: Scripted import definitions are unreliable.

In my current attempt, I'm trying to update 11 tables from the previous database using a scripted import. Ten of the tables work fine -- all fields correctly map into the new tables using the Matching Names option.

But on the 11th table, FMP invariably displays the fields in a jumbled match order (and declares "last order", of course) -- even though the import step is set up in the same way as the others. This has happened with most of my past attempts at these scripts and my notes indicate it happens with different files. I've seen one other forum post about this specific issue (but with no response).

Is there some secret to getting an import definition to stay locked on to the right field names? BTW, the specific table does contain 200+ fields, although the field names haven't changed in months and months.

Any thoughts on reasons for the failure? -- or of what to try?

Thanks in advance for any help.

[mr_vodka]

See here.

http://www.fmforums.com/forum/showtopic.php?tid/190120

If the schema of the source side of th import gets changed, then it breaks. However, if you ADD new fields and do not rearrange the fields, it will add it to the bottom of the import. However, if you change the field order around, rename a field, or delete a field in the middle of the define field list, then it will break your mapping.

[K1200]

Thanks for pointing out that thread. I missed it somehow.

"I am dumbfounded at FileMaker." (LaRetta)

My sentiments, exactly. The one import mechanism that should be able to work rain or shine is Matching Names within the same table.

Anyone know when 9.5 is coming out?

[fabriceN]

A great, great feature would be import from a FileMaker table based on FIELD ID.

Together with a working "Set Next Serial Value" script step, (when no field is selected), it would save us much, much work and, as you said, improve greatly reliability.

I have uploaded this feature request. If you share this concern, it might be good to do it as well.

http://www.filemaker.com/company/feedback

Edited April 3, 2008 by Guest