Re: [WebDNA] i wish we could require one *amongst of a collection* of search comparisons/params
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2011
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 107299
interpreted = N
texte = Aaron, that is pretty sharp/clever of you ;-) Cool. I did hack around it last night with [tables].. and so far so good.. but = in case of any arising issues as all that data grows in size.. I am = going to remember what you suggested. I think I ought keep you on my = list of people to see if they are for hire, if I ever need :-) If any other ideas pop in, please share. Thanks -Govinda p.s. - BTW, (for anyone who cares), I will bottom post when anyone = favors that too.. but just not when it would require copy/paste on = their replies to change to bottom posting. For the newbies - "bottom = posting" means when we always write our replies *below* any former text, = as opposed to on top, see i am top-posting here/now... it is quick and a = habit.. but makes for harder reading when someone comes along and tries = to read (make sense) from the archives. On 2011-08-29, at 12:09 PM, aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com wrote: > I just had a thought=85. >=20 > If you're "eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]" string is looking = up client by a unique ID and you know that [aaa] will not be in either = FIELDyyy or FIELDzzz, then maybe you could still do the grouping this = way >=20 > group1field=3Dfieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz&wagroup1datarq=3D[aaa] [bbb] >=20 > between "fieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz", the search would have to find = both [aaa] and [bbb], right? >=20 >=20 > On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Govinda wrote: >=20 >> I am pretty sure I tried that (in the past), but, IIRC, grouping = fields does not work when you have other search params/criteria = *outside* of the grouped fields; grouped fields are only useful when = they are the only search criteria. >>=20 >> Thanks for replying. :-) >>=20 >> Anyone have any ideas? >>=20 >> Thanks >> -Govinda >>=20 >> On 2011-08-29, at 10:02 AM, aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com wrote: >>=20 >>> It looks like a GroupFields in the search string would do the trick >>>=20 >>=20 >>>> I need to find records that belong to a client (in a db full of = records for lots of clients), *AND* where a user-input string is found = in one of several other fields. >>>>=20 >>>> So... >>>>=20 >>>> I wish i had a good quick way (without loading a big RAM [table] = (which crash webdna when they get too large)) to effectively do this: >>>>=20 >>>> imaginary (sample) syntax: >>>>=20 >>>> [Search = db=3Dqqqqqq.db&eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]&eqFIELDyyydatarq1of2= =3D[bbb]&eqFIELDzzzdatarq2of2=3D[bbb]] >>>> [!]--- >>>> would return records where: >>>> 1.) [THIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIRED] *necessarily = contained* "[aaa]" >>>> *AND*=20 >>>> 2.) *ANY* (*but at least one*) of these = conditions were met: >>>> 2a.) [FIELDyyy] contained "[bbb]" >>>> *OR* >>>> 2b.) [FIELDzzz] contained "[bbb]" >>>> ---[/!] >>>> [/Search] >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Given version 6.02, How would you do this (without a [table])? >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks >>>> -Govinda >>=20 >>=20 >> - Govinda >> -------------- >> Old WebDNA talklist archives: >> http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/index.tpl?db=3Dwebdna-talk >>=20 >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >> the mailing list
. >> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Aaron, that is pretty sharp/clever of you ;-) Cool. I did hack around it last night with [tables].. and so far so good.. but = in case of any arising issues as all that data grows in size.. I am = going to remember what you suggested. I think I ought keep you on my = list of people to see if they are for hire, if I ever need :-) If any other ideas pop in, please share. Thanks -Govinda p.s. - BTW, (for anyone who cares), I will bottom post when anyone = favors that too.. but just not when it would require copy/paste on = their replies to change to bottom posting. For the newbies - "bottom = posting" means when we always write our replies *below* any former text, = as opposed to on top, see i am top-posting here/now... it is quick and a = habit.. but makes for harder reading when someone comes along and tries = to read (make sense) from the archives. On 2011-08-29, at 12:09 PM, aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com wrote: > I just had a thought=85. >=20 > If you're "eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]" string is looking = up client by a unique ID and you know that [aaa] will not be in either = FIELDyyy or FIELDzzz, then maybe you could still do the grouping this = way >=20 > group1field=3Dfieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz&wagroup1datarq=3D[aaa] [bbb] >=20 > between "fieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz", the search would have to find = both [aaa] and [bbb], right? >=20 >=20 > On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Govinda wrote: >=20 >> I am pretty sure I tried that (in the past), but, IIRC, grouping = fields does not work when you have other search params/criteria = *outside* of the grouped fields; grouped fields are only useful when = they are the only search criteria. >>=20 >> Thanks for replying. :-) >>=20 >> Anyone have any ideas? >>=20 >> Thanks >> -Govinda >>=20 >> On 2011-08-29, at 10:02 AM, aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com wrote: >>=20 >>> It looks like a GroupFields in the search string would do the trick >>>=20 >>=20 >>>> I need to find records that belong to a client (in a db full of = records for lots of clients), *AND* where a user-input string is found = in one of several other fields. >>>>=20 >>>> So... >>>>=20 >>>> I wish i had a good quick way (without loading a big RAM [table] = (which crash webdna when they get too large)) to effectively do this: >>>>=20 >>>> imaginary (sample) syntax: >>>>=20 >>>> [Search = db=3Dqqqqqq.db&eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]&eqFIELDyyydatarq1of2= =3D[bbb]&eqFIELDzzzdatarq2of2=3D[bbb]] >>>> [!]--- >>>> would return records where: >>>> 1.) [THIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIRED] *necessarily = contained* "[aaa]" >>>> *AND*=20 >>>> 2.) *ANY* (*but at least one*) of these = conditions were met: >>>> 2a.) [FIELDyyy] contained "[bbb]" >>>> *OR* >>>> 2b.) [FIELDzzz] contained "[bbb]" >>>> ---[/!] >>>> [/Search] >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Given version 6.02, How would you do this (without a [table])? >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks >>>> -Govinda >>=20 >>=20 >> - Govinda >> -------------- >> Old WebDNA talklist archives: >> http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/index.tpl?db=3Dwebdna-talk >>=20 >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >> the mailing list . >> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Govinda
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
WebMerchant Q (2000)
WCS Newbie question (1997)
OT: ZIP & SIT files on OSX (2002)
WebCatalog NT beta 18 problem (1997)
New Webcatalog for Mac (1997)
[WebDNA] WebDNA staging server (2008)
NetSplat and WebCat2 (1997)
problems with 2 tags (1997)
Upgrading old WebCat Database Files (1997)
Finding max value for a field (1997)
Bug? (1997)
WC2b15 File Corruption (1997)
Storefornts (1997)
Encrypt and Commit Me (1998)
Template not found error messages (1997)
Adding up line items. (2000)
[WebDNA] Exclude found items in a 2nd search (2016)
multiple price line in formula.db (2004)
Incrementing a number (1998)
Execute Applescript (1997)