Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected.

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2010


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 106057
interpreted = N
texte = It seems that you hit reply on the wrong thread Frank. :-) -G On Dec 28, 2010, at 7:28 PM, C. Frank Wolfe wrote: > That happens to me all the time. I have to make sure that Owner, > Group, and You, can all read and write. I use the Apple Get info > dialog for each DB. > > Be sure to close the database [closedatabase] before checking your > changes because if the DB is in memory it does not seem to recognize > the permission changes. > > frank > > On Dec 28, 2010, at 2:15 PM, Govinda wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> version=6.0 >> platform=unix-Linux Intel RedHat >> >> I hit a wall with group searching which I did not expect. >> Can you guys confirm the behavior so I can move on to tackling the >> problem another way? (Meanwhile I keep thinking group searching >> *should* work the way I want, no?) >> >> imagine a db like so: >> >> ==================== START my.db ============================== >> feeled1_Fruitfeeled2_WhereGrownfeeled3_HowUsed >> 1applewashingtonbaked dessert >> 2bananaecuadorbreakfast >> 3cherrycaliforniabaked dessert >> 4mangoindiaspecial treat >> 5pineapplehawaiisweet indian curry >> 6blueberrycaliforniabaked dessert >> ==================== END my.db ================================ >> >> We would think that this: >> [search >> db >> = >> my >> .db >> &group1field >> = >> feeled1_Fruit >> &group2field >> = >> feeled1_Fruit >> &eqgroup1data >> =1apple&eqgroup2data=3cherry&wsfeeled3_HowUseddatarq=[URL]baked >> dessert[/URL]&max=500] >> >> ...should return the 1st and 3rd record, correct? >> >> But it returns the 1st, 3rd, and 6th records. >> >> If you were coding this, how would you write this search so that it >> finds ONLY record #1 & #3, using grouped fields? >> >> (I need to be able to tell the search to return records where: >> -[feeled3_HowUsed] = baked dessert, *AND* >> -[feeled1_Fruit] = (*either* "1apple" or "3cherry" or "4mango" >> >> ...which is only records #1 and #3.) >> >> ------------ >> Govinda Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Govinda 2010)
  2. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Terry Wilson 2010)
  3. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Govinda 2010)
  4. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. ("Terry Wilson" 2010)
  5. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Govinda 2010)
  6. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Kenneth Grome 2010)
  7. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Govinda 2010)
  8. Re: [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (frank@cwolfe.com 2010)
  9. [WebDNA] group searching not working as expected. (Govinda 2010)
It seems that you hit reply on the wrong thread Frank. :-) -G On Dec 28, 2010, at 7:28 PM, C. Frank Wolfe wrote: > That happens to me all the time. I have to make sure that Owner, > Group, and You, can all read and write. I use the Apple Get info > dialog for each DB. > > Be sure to close the database [closedatabase] before checking your > changes because if the DB is in memory it does not seem to recognize > the permission changes. > > frank > > On Dec 28, 2010, at 2:15 PM, Govinda wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> version=6.0 >> platform=unix-Linux Intel RedHat >> >> I hit a wall with group searching which I did not expect. >> Can you guys confirm the behavior so I can move on to tackling the >> problem another way? (Meanwhile I keep thinking group searching >> *should* work the way I want, no?) >> >> imagine a db like so: >> >> ==================== START my.db ============================== >> feeled1_Fruitfeeled2_WhereGrownfeeled3_HowUsed >> 1applewashingtonbaked dessert >> 2bananaecuadorbreakfast >> 3cherrycaliforniabaked dessert >> 4mangoindiaspecial treat >> 5pineapplehawaiisweet indian curry >> 6blueberrycaliforniabaked dessert >> ==================== END my.db ================================ >> >> We would think that this: >> [search >> db >> = >> my >> .db >> &group1field >> = >> feeled1_Fruit >> &group2field >> = >> feeled1_Fruit >> &eqgroup1data >> =1apple&eqgroup2data=3cherry&wsfeeled3_HowUseddatarq=[url]baked >> dessert[/URL]&max=500] >> >> ...should return the 1st and 3rd record, correct? >> >> But it returns the 1st, 3rd, and 6th records. >> >> If you were coding this, how would you write this search so that it >> finds ONLY record #1 & #3, using grouped fields? >> >> (I need to be able to tell the search to return records where: >> -[feeled3_HowUsed] = baked dessert, *AND* >> -[feeled1_Fruit] = (*either* "1apple" or "3cherry" or "4mango" >> >> ...which is only records #1 and #3.) >> >> ------------ >> Govinda 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:

Search Problems (2000) Image download problem (2001) authenticating a second user (1997) formula??? (2000) WebCat2b15MacPlugin - showing [math] (1997) Getting Total Quantity (1997) WebCat2final1 crashes (1997) Webdna sends your serial number on Internet (2003) emailer on Windows Beta 18 (1997) Search/sort in URL Was: GuestBook example (1997) displaying New products (Yikes! it's Fixed!) (1997) OFF-TOPIC: Stop reloading SRC page from cache ... (2003) Announcing general availabilty of WebDNA 4.5 release (2002) [WebDNA] Cicada - WebDNA_CICADA_6.1.b02 - gratz and request...! (2009) Refresh cart# (1999) If search results are blank... (2003) Quick Data sorting questions (2002) Re:[input] context (1999) Problems With NT 4.0.1 Install (2000) "+" in math context (2004)