Jump to content

Table Occurrence Requirement


Chuck
 Share

This topic is 2936 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

My initial run of the baseline revealed an assumed requirement that I don't see mentioned in the setup instructions: That table occurrences exist that are named identically to the table names. This wasn't the case in the solution I tried integrating the audit log into. Similar to how there's been a request for the ability to personalize field names, I'd request the ability to personalize table occurrence names that should be included in such scripts. Alternatively, perhaps the ability to specify a prefix or suffix to base table names ("DEV_" in my case). Or, of course, a mention of this requirement in the setup instructions.

 

Thanks,

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

 

Well, when I followed the setup instructions and executed a baseline run of the log, the ExecuteSQL function that ran at about line 446 return a question mark instead of the UUIDs. Adding table occurrences identically named to the tables fixed this.

 

Thanks,

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chuck,

 

THANKS for posting this.  I may have the same problem.  I am using anchor buoy with abbreviated TO names.  In my case, I see 3 solutions: 

 

-Rename my anchor TOs to match table names but I don’t like this.  I like my abbreviated TO names for anchor buoy methodology.  (e.g. I don’t want to rename INV to invoices).  So this solution is no good.

-Introduce new TOs with the table names.  I don’t like this because it will clutter up my TO lists when assigning fields etc etc.  So this solution is no good...

-Rename my tables to match anchor TOs.  This I could do but I am reluctant.  I like a more fulsome name so I can remember.  Still I guess this is the best of the options available.  

 

Also an interesting point is if I do any of these things I now have to be careful about renaming things…  So we have the “rigidity” of SQL ending up in FM because of the use of ExecuteSQL…  ditto for avoiding SQL reserved words.  No big deal I suppose but an interesting observation.

 

-Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check / Chris --

 

I've got some good news to report on about this issue...

 

Beta 2 now handles the situation where a base table has no similarly names table occurrences on the relationship graph. For example, in the demo database, where the base table name is "Surveys," if the only TO based on it is named "SurveysX," then the logging operations work.

 

I've got a few additional items on the Beta 2 to do list. At this point, most of the bigger items have been completed, including support for user definable EA fields, the more modular script approach, and more. I also need to do additional testing. But my goal is to release it sometime next week.

 

Thanks for the feedback, the bug reports, suggestions, and most of all, your patience!

 

-- Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is 2936 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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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