I'm sorry that I got your name wrong in my last post, Polychronis,
especially as you - along with Larry and JM - seem to have cracked it! Thank
you very much to each of you.

Putting the maximum count number first is a neat trick that's well worth
remembering.

Thanks & regards,
Alastair.


----- Original Message -----
From: "ELOEN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:01 AM
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Rule problem


> Hi Alastair,
>
> you are right in that it's not so easy as it seems from the 1st look.
> I think this should work now:
>
> RULE 'Limit of [ 10 ] entries reached!' FOR Top10_Performances SUCC+
>   WHERE 10 > (SELE (COUNT(*)) FROM Top10_Performances T1 WHERE+
>   T1.Inst_Type = Top10_Performances.Inst_Type AND T1.Top10_Performan_ID+
>   <> Top10_Performances.Top10_Performan_ID)
>
> The idea belongs to Lawrence Lustig and JM (see attachment) and is this:
>
> 1. You need to have a primary key (Top10_Performan_ID) on this table, so
you
> can exclude the current row from the COUNT.
> 2. You can use a (sub-) SELECT as a 2nd operand in a WHERE clause
>
> For the check of null values I would prefer NOT NULL Constraint.
>
> Regards
> Polychronis T. Kontos
> Athens, Greece
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Alastair Burr
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:46 PM
> > To: RBASE-L Mailing List
> > Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Rule problem
> >
> >
> > Thanks, Eloen,
> >
> > I tried your suggestion straight away and I think that the rule works
(see
> > below) - with one change:
> > I replaced:
> > T1.Inst_Type = Top10_Performances.Inst_Type
> > with:
> > T1.Inst_Type IS NOT NULL
> >
> > That's a better solution than an (otherwise useless) view but I can
still
> > add more than
> > 10 rows with the same Inst_Type from the browser/editor as long as I
don't
> > leave the editor. As soon as I leave and go back then the rule message
> > appears when I try to edit where the count is more than 10.
> >

Reply via email to