Creating relationships that auto populate

[etsmarines]

I have a table called services.

 

I want to be able to create a portal inside that services layout that allows me to relate one service to another. I want the service that i related to also show that relationship in the portal on its record.

 

So in other words lets say i have three services.

 

A

B

C

 

If i relate Service B to Service A in the portal I want to be able to click on Service B on the services layout and see that it is related to service A. Currently if I relate B to A on the A record, when i go to record B it does not show that it is related to A.

 

Thanks for the help guys!

 

-Erik

 

 

[comment]

Could you explain what does such relationship represent in real life?

 

 

See also:

http://fmforums.com/forum/topic/38282-join-table-inverse-relationships/

[etsmarines]

In real life think of a CMDB (Configuration Management Database)

 

If i have an application listed in the CMDB and i relate it to another application.

 

For example Windows 2000 is related to Microsoft Word (another application in the CMDB)

 

I should be able to search for Microsoft Word and see that it is related to Windows 2000 even though i only made that relationship from WIN2000 to MS WORD and not the other way around (MS WORD to WIN2000)

 

Right now if i relate one record to another I can only see that relationship if i am on the one record. If i go to the record that i related to i cannot see that it is related to anything. This should happen automatically (although i do not know how).

[comment]

You haven't really answered my question regarding the nature of the relationship. There is a difference between the relationship of an operating system to an application running on that system (basically a one-to-many, parent-child relationship, with a clear direction) and say linking acquaintances (with no particular direction).

 

In any case, I suggest you read the thread I linked to earlier in depth. I believe all the possibilities were discussed there in detail, and nothing has changed since (except possibly some new techniques to implement the same ideas, e.g. by using ExecuteSQL).