Jump to content
Claris Engage 2025 - March 25-26 Austin Texas ×
The Claris Museum: The Vault of FileMaker Antiquities at Claris Engage 2025! ×

This topic is 4900 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hi All

Please help me out from this peculiar thing....

I am having a layout on table ,say, A ,. Let the layout name is "A-Layout" .

This layout has calculation fields from table A.

But the calculations definition are based on Table B and Table C

The relationship are below.

A-----------B----------------------C----------------D

I am having another layout on table ,say, B ,. Let the layout name is "B-Layout" .

This layout has calculation fields from table B.

But the calculations definition are based on Table B and Table C

and C values are dependent on D ,E, F table

But datas are not coming in "B-Layout" ..

The peculiar thing is that when another layout "A-Layout" .is opened besides "B-Layout" .and the operation is performed

then the corresponding calculation values in the "B-Layout" .appears on the screen

PLease help................................

Posted

Make sure that the records are being committed, and the windows are being refreshed (with the flush cached joins option selected).

Unstored calculations are not refreshed unless necessary. FMP sometimes needs to be told "it's necessary" and that's what the refresh window step does.

Posted

The the relationships are probably not what you believe them to be. For instance, data from F will not propagate to C unless there are related records in F, E and D. There has to be a continuous chain of related records right through all the relationships. Also check whether the relationships have unstored fields on the child side, these will be invalid.

Easy test: put a portal to F on the B layout and see what related records it displays. If none appear: there is the answer.

Best bet is to zip a copy of the file and post it to the Forums.

BTW describing tables as A, B etc is the most successful way to get people to ignore the question. The second best way is to then describe your real situation -- after several posts are made -- that has nothing in common with the scenario that has previously been discussed. :D

Posted

A-----------B----------------------C----------------D

This is a meaningless description. Give your tables meaningful names and indicate their role in the relationship, e.g.

Customers -< Invoices -< Lineitems >- Products

Also provide some details about the calculations.

Posted

But the process still doesnot work

Did you do the simple test I suggested?

This topic is 4900 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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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