Record Omission - special case

[Greg Hains]

Hi.

I have a scenario that I cannot quite resolve and would like to know if anybody can point me in the right direction please.

I have a table with a list of about 500 clients and a unique ID for each. I need some of those clients hidden (by omission) to certain users (logged in) when browsing lists.

Currently I have a global variable with the ID of one or more clients in it, and as the list is opened, if the variable is not empty, then it runs a loop from record 1 to n omitting each record that meets that pattern. It works OK, but as I have several ways of manipulating that list (Live Search etc), it's become a headache to ensure that omission script is run at the right time and not mucking up the other process running.

Is there an easier way to do this please?

Greg

[mr_vodka]

What is the purpose here. If its a security issue then you should be using record level access under: Manage --> Security.

[Greg Hains]

Hi John,

Thank you for this. To be quite honest, I had never ventured into record level access - only scripts and layouts etc.

This will solve my problem.

Cheers,

Greg

[Greg Hains]

Hi John,

Further to this...

How do I display a list of records, excluding those to which I have no access? I would use a Find, but not sure how to search only for records where Get(RecordAccess)>0. I wan thinking of a calculation field that was not stored, but that is self-defeating. lol

Cheers,

Greg

[comment]

Any find will automatically exclude records the user has no access to. The thing to watch for is 'Show All Records' - you don't want your users to have access to that. Of course, they won't be shown anything they are not supposed to view, but the result - a bunch of 'No access" records - can be rather ugly.

[Greg Hains]

Hi Comment, ( my regular saviour... :-) )

I do use Show All Records in my scripts, but would normally apply a Find *after* that to limit any records. What would be the best "dummy" find to use to list all records for a user - excluding No Access ones - because basically I want to see all records other than the No Access ones.

Its probably a silly question...

Greg

[mr_vodka]

Search for star * in the primary ID field. I would recommend using a custom menu set to over ride the show all command.

[Greg Hains]

Many thanks. :-)

[Greg Hains]

Good evening.

I have found an additional aspect of this problem.

What if I need to show all records that the user is allowed to see (Find * works fine) as well as limiting another field. I see that the Find * tends override the other filter - even with a New Record/Request in the script doing the find.

How would I incorporate another find at the same time excluding the <no access> records?

Thanks.

[comment]

Not sure what you mean by "limiting another field". As mentioned earlier, any find will automatically exclude all records to which the user has no access.

[Greg Hains]

Hi Comment.

How does a "Show All Records" differ to a "Find *" in terms of <No Access> records?

I don't doubt your expertise at all, but have found with my solution here that if I want to display only client records that have a pattern of "john" in one of two fields as well as exclude <No Access> records, then I run into problems. The "Find *" command on it's own works fine - does what it's supposed to, but I need to display the "john" records as well as hiding <No Access>

In the past when I have searched for multiple criteria then I enter Find mode, insert criteria into one field, New record, insert criteria into next field then Perform Find. I can seem to use this method. Should I be employing it a certain way?

[mr_vodka]

As comment has already pointed out many times, ANY find whether finding for 'John' or using a '*' to override the Show All records command will omit the No access records.

You should be able to use your old find method. The reason I talked about finding with * in your ID field is only for the purposes of overriding the Show All Command.

[comment]

To illustrate further, let's have sample data:

NAME, ACCESS

John, Yes

John, No

Mary, Yes

and a user that has no access to records where ACCESS = "No". When this user calls Show All Records, they'll see 3 records:

John

<no access>

Mary

A find for * in the NAME field will produce a found set of two records:

John

Mary

and a find for "John" will find one record only:

John

[Greg Hains]

Hi guys.

Sorry to be frustratingly dense, but I was getting mixed results. Perhaps its better to steer clear of Show All Records then?

I will play the FInd game and see how I go.

Thank you again for your help.

[mr_vodka]

Not sure what your issue can be. See this demo. I did it as an fp7 file so that those that are not on 12 can make use of it.

* Note - This overrides the custom menu for the Show All command. Also, when the file first opens it will open with the default Admin account with [Full Access] privileges.

LockingRecords_ShowAll.zip