Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

FMForums.com

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Replace Field Contents flaky behaviour

Featured Replies

Sometimes Replace Field Contents just doesn't seem to work.

For instance, doing [color:red]Replace Field Contents [No dialog; some_related_table::number; 1] will work.

However, [color:red]Replace Field Contents [No dialog; some_related_table::number; some_related_table::number-1] will only work most of the time. No error is returned, and seemingly nothing gets replaced (on some occasions, one record at random gets changed.

One of the causes I found is if one of the fields used in the relationship is global, then this behaviour is likely to occur. However it was happening for me today and I couldn't find any global fields. The only other explanation in this case could be that the target table was linked through 3 other tables first, so perhaps it's the number of iterations that's the problem?

I have a workaround which suits me in this instance, which basically involves looping through rows on a named portal on the layout, but this isn't ideal. Any advice would be appreciated.

A demo file showing the problem would be useful.

I have a workaround which suits me in this instance, which basically involves looping through rows on a named portal on the layout, but this isn't ideal.

I believe it would be better to:

Go to Related Record [show related only]

Replace Field Contents [ ... ]

Go to Layout [original layout]

I have a workaround which suits me in this instance, which basically involves looping through rows on a named portal on the layout, but this isn't ideal.

Why are a GTRR(SO) not fired ahead, since record locking by other users action can easily be an issue on the one side of the relation, while a bit more random on the many side?

But basicly would the Replace not be suitable in a multiuser environment, and if I'm not mistaken a sign of a flawed relational structure ... since what you seems to do is synchronising - something the normalization initially should have zapped the need for??

--sd

Create an account or sign in to comment

Important Information

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

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.