Makes complete sense to me. I wish more systems let me save my search
criteria (Google should remember my searches - it's like bookmarking URL's
;) ).
------------
Actually (don't tell anyone) but it makes sense to me too, just wanted to avoid having
to answer questions like "Why do you want to save the search anyway" ;-))
------------
But it really comes down to what you are saving and how they can "run it
all at once". I can see why structAppend may not work (because there may
be duplicate fields if they all came from the same form originally).
------------
They will be coming from the same form, well, there are two forms, but I'll take care
of that and have them run it seperately for each form.
------------
Do you mean you want them to run all the queries and get the results back
as one composite result ?
------------
Correct...
Very short example:
Search 1
<wddxPacket version='1.0'>
<header/>
<data>
<struct>
<var name='SUBURB'><string>Chermside</string></var>
</struct>
</data>
</wddxPacket>
Search 2
<wddxPacket version='1.0'>
<header/>
<data>
<struct>
<var name='SUBURB'><string>Aspley</string></var>
</struct>
</data>
</wddxPacket>
The result I want is (what I had in mind before posting)
(form, "suburb", "Chermside,Aspley")
Where form is the structure, suburb is the key (form field) and the value becomes a
list.
------------
If so, consider creating each of the query strings (for each of their
saved criteria) separately (assuming the same fields and the same
datasource tables) and then concatenating the queries in a UNION. Your
problem here is going to be disparate ORDER BY clauses (as a UNION must
have only one ORDER BY).
------------
If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting:
3 searches
Loop over the searches (i.e. 3 times) run the search
When finished looping do a QofQ and Voila! I see QofQ can now handle UNIONs in CFMX!
Not a bad idea... And when I think about it, this might actually be the best way of
doing it. Instead of appending the structure values, because appending the structure
values could create invalid search criteria, for example;
Where 2,3,5,7 would be a valid search criteria for a dropdown, "Fred Blogs, Jane Doe,
Willy Nelson" would not be a valid search criteria.
------------
The other way would be to execute all the queries separately and make a
single QofQ that held all the results (and you can then mix and match
fields from disparate queries). Each of the queries could then have it's
own ORDER BY clause and you could create a "psuedo" ORDER BY to ensure the
results came back in the correct groups (ie. the order in which the
queries were executed and then - within that - the order by for each of
the separate queries).
How does all that sound ?
------------
That sounds excellent, where can I send the money to;-))
Taco
---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia
http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004
