Searching function problem

Scriptcase 8 Discussion
#1

Hi!:wink:
I am trying to use the search function of a grid application,
but then I found out that I cannot search those field that does not exist in the original table.
For example, I created a field Dpt.Name with a grid lookup in order to retrieve a field from the other table:

Grid of Table A:
Name | Dpt.Code | Dpt.Name

Grid of Table B:

Dpt.Code | Dpt.Name

But then when I use the search function on that grid of Table A, I found out that I cannot search those records by typing Dpt.Name,
also if I try to perform a dynamic search on Dpt.Name, a error message will popup:

Is there any way to perform searching on fields that doesn’t belong in the orignal table?

Capture.PNG

#2

Yes, but not what you like … You must create a new (hidden) field for the full Dpt.Name and fill this field at event onRecord.

#3

I did that too,by using something like this:
$id={id};
$sql=“SELECT contact_name
FROM supplier_contact
WHERE supplier=”.$id;
sc_lookup(ds,$sql);
{contact}={ds[0][0]};

but that when type in a contact_name exist in one of those fields to search, no result is shown in the quick search,
and there is still an error message pop up if I use dynamic search.

#4

Have you included the contact field in the field list for quicksearch and select a search criteria (scroll down …)?

#5

Yes, but the searching still won’t work :confused:

#6

Ah, is see … report this as bug: a manuell included field(name) is not included in the sql search condition via quick search.

#7

Think it through, it can’t work because you cannot search for something that doesn’t exist in the record set.

To make it work you have to either create a view and base the grid on it or join the tables in the SQL statement of grid A.

SELECT name, deptcode, deptname FROM table_a a LEFT OUTER JOIN table_b b ON a.deptcode = b.deptcode

That should do it.

jsb

#8

I had the same issue with one of our projects and I had to create a view in MySQL then I could search/sort how I wanted.

Dave

#9

Hi Brian,
I agree with JSB. Move that within the SQL using the right Join type.

#10

Yes, you are right … Thanks!