Hmm, that might actually work Carey. The table looping is a good idea. I
can make a display only form, let them select values to create a
qualification in a temp field to use to populate a hidden table then
loop that table to populate a field with the unique values. Then use
that field to open my form with only those values. What a pain lol

Joe and Norm, that's for the idea on that one. I don't think it would
work though because the time frame is a variable, so there's no way I
could know when it was right to create another record or not.

Thanks for the advice everyone.

-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carey Matthew Black
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 11:40 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Unique ID?


Dylan,

Could the "user variables" be put into an Advanced Search Bar syntax?

If so..
  a Menu could produce the list of unique values
OR
  table looping could reduce the list to unique values in a separate
field

Just an idea...

-- 
Carey Matthew Black
Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP)
ARS = Action Request System(Remedy)

Love, then teach
Solution = People + Process + Tools
Fast, Accurate, Cheap.... Pick two.



On 9/28/07, Wheeler, Dylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> **
>
> Yeah,  that's the problem Ben.
> Lets  say they run a search for all the records that were modified 
> between  09/01/2007 and 09/14/2007. A record could be modified 5 times

> on 5  different days and so it would show up in the search 5 times. I 
> just wish I  could do a distinct join, which it looks like I'm not 
> being slow today, it's  just not possible without using a table field 
> and direct  sql.
>
> It  would be easy if I could just create them a report in crystal but 
> there are just  too many user variables that they need to be able to 
> input
>
> Dylan

<snip>

>        "Wheeler, Dylan"          <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)"
<[email protected]>
>
> 09/28/2007 12:17 PM
>
> Please respond                to
> [email protected]
>
>
> To             [email protected]
>
> cc
>
>
> Subject             Unique          ID?
>
>
> **
> Maybe it's too early in the day but I can't    get my head wrapped
around a problem.
> A    group here needs to keep track of when records in a form gets
modified. They    want to be able to search for a date range and come up
with the records    modified in that date range. Simple enough. The
problem I run into is if a    record gets updated a month ago, then it
gets updated today. If they do their    time search for the records that
were updated a month ago, it wont show in    that list.
> So I created a table, every time    the record gets modified it pushes
to a new table and creates a timestamp    record. Created a join form
between the parent and the timestamp form. Works    great except I can't
get it to show me only unique records. So if a record    gets modified
twice in a time period, when they do their search on my join, it    will
show two of that record.
> Am I going    about this the wrong way?
>
> Like Joe I'm trying to stay away from the coffee and tea    just
doesn't have that same bite heh
>
> -------------
>
> Dylan Wheeler
> Production Control Analyst    Principal
> IT Operations
> Downey Savings & Loan Association, F.A.
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

________________________________________________________________________
_______
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where
the Answers Are"


This message and any attachments are for the intended recipient(s) only and may 
contain privileged, confidential and/or proprietary information about Downey 
Savings or its customers, which Downey Savings does not intend to disclose to 
the public.  If you received this message by mistake, please notify the sender 
by reply e-mail and delete the message and attachments.

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the 
Answers Are"

Reply via email to