Jump to content
Claris Engage 2025 - March 25-26 Austin Texas ×

This topic is 4047 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

Posted

perhaps, this subject has been made before. But I couldnt fınd in  forums. and my brain has stopped for now.please help

 

I have a field "city" named. there are so many records in city field. for example 1 paris, 2 newyork  and 3 istanbul records.I want to see this result in portal thank you so much.

Example.zip

Posted

I think I couldnt explain what  my problem is.

 

I want to make a summary in portal within the same table, ıf you examine my Attached File you understant better.

Posted

Of course I examined your attached file.   :hmm:

 

Did you examine the attachment in the link I provided?  There is no difference between relating to another table or to the same table; principle is the same.  

 

What part are you stuck on?  We can help you with it.  

Posted

Here is a sample, since it can be easier in your case than the link I provided.  

 

1) Create another table occurrence called Cities 3.

2) Join Cities 2 to Cities 3 on City

3) Portal should be based upon Cities 2 as you have it.

4) Summary count field within the portal must be based upon Cities 3

5) Portal filter should be:  Cities 3::id = Cities 2::id

 

By looking through to another table occurrence, we can isolate the entries in the portal to only one each since Cities 2 can only *see* the first related Cities 3 record.  Then summary from that new table occurrence counts all related.

ExampleMOD.fmp12.zip

Posted

I just thought ... you could also use ExecuteSQL() to generate a unique list of counted cities.  It would not produce a portal but you could get a columnar list displayed in a field with a scroll bar - no extra table occurrences needed. 

 

I mention it because filtered portals are resource-intensive if there are a lot of related records and/or if the filter criteria is not static (which this is not).  If this is a customers table with several thousand records, for example then the ExecuteSQL() method might be faster.  And it would decrease graph clutter since two extra table occurrences wouldn't be necessary.

This topic is 4047 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.