jekacher Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 I have three related tables: Case, Part, and PartBilling There is a one-to-many relationship between Case and Part, likewise with Part and PartBilling In a layout showing records from Case, there is a portal showing the related PartBilling records. However, within the portal I also want to display data corresponding to the appropriate Part (parent data). This parent data does not display appropriately; instead each instance of PartBilling in the portal will only match data from the 1st Part record related to Case (even if that record is not related to PartBilling). What's going on here? It seems as if within portals FileMaker can correctly navigate to child records, but not backward up the relationship tree. Is there any workaround? I would just make the portal show records from Part, but then it will miss multiple child PartBilling records.
jekacher Posted June 3, 2008 Author Posted June 3, 2008 Figured out how to do it. It seems that portals are only meant for display related child data, not parent data. The workaround is to create calculation fields in the child table that points to the field in the parent table that you want to display. I made it an unstored calculation.
mr_vodka Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 First if you have a One to Many between Case to Part and then Part to Part Billing, is this the current way you are using it for your portal? Case --< Part --< Part Billing or do you have a foreign key in Part Billing with the case ID? Please explain your setup along with what your keys for your relationship are. Anyway, if you have a portal with Part Billing and your are referencing the parent TO in Part, it will give you the first related record.
comment Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 You need to tack on another TO of Child BEHIND the Grandchild (from the Parent's point-of-view). Then use the fields from this TO in the portal from Parent to Grandchild.
jekacher Posted June 4, 2008 Author Posted June 4, 2008 Yes, the relationships are as you diagrammed: Case---- I found exactly as you described: the parent TO shows the first related record.
jekacher Posted June 4, 2008 Author Posted June 4, 2008 Gotcha, that worked. It is probably a better way to do it than calculations referencing the parent table. Thanks, - John
Newbies ohthetrees Posted December 18, 2008 Newbies Posted December 18, 2008 Sorry for the ignorance, but what does "TO" mean?
Fenton Posted December 18, 2008 Posted December 18, 2008 Table occurrence. Also known as the big boxes on the Relationship Graph.
Recommended Posts
This topic is 5914 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now