Re: [WebDNA] i wish we could require one *amongst of a collection* of search comparisons/params
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2011
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 107298
interpreted = N
texte = I just had a thought=85. If you're "eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]" string is looking up = client by a unique ID and you know that [aaa] will not be in either = FIELDyyy or FIELDzzz, then maybe you could still do the grouping this = way group1field=3Dfieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz&wagroup1datarq=3D[aaa] [bbb] between "fieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz", the search would have to find both = [aaa] and [bbb], right? On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Govinda wrote: > I am pretty sure I tried that (in the past), but, IIRC, grouping = fields does not work when you have other search params/criteria = *outside* of the grouped fields; grouped fields are only useful when = they are the only search criteria. >=20 > Thanks for replying. :-) >=20 > Anyone have any ideas? >=20 > Thanks > -Govinda >=20 > On 2011-08-29, at 10:02 AM, aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com wrote: >=20 >> It looks like a GroupFields in the search string would do the trick >>=20 >=20 >>> I need to find records that belong to a client (in a db full of = records for lots of clients), *AND* where a user-input string is found = in one of several other fields. >>>=20 >>> So... >>>=20 >>> I wish i had a good quick way (without loading a big RAM [table] = (which crash webdna when they get too large)) to effectively do this: >>>=20 >>> imaginary (sample) syntax: >>>=20 >>> [Search = db=3Dqqqqqq.db&eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]&eqFIELDyyydatarq1of2= =3D[bbb]&eqFIELDzzzdatarq2of2=3D[bbb]] >>> [!]--- >>> would return records where: >>> 1.) [THIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIRED] *necessarily = contained* "[aaa]" >>> *AND*=20 >>> 2.) *ANY* (*but at least one*) of these = conditions were met: >>> 2a.) [FIELDyyy] contained "[bbb]" >>> *OR* >>> 2b.) [FIELDzzz] contained "[bbb]" >>> ---[/!] >>> [/Search] >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Given version 6.02, How would you do this (without a [table])? >>>=20 >>> Thanks >>> -Govinda >=20 >=20 > - Govinda > -------------- > Old WebDNA talklist archives: > http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/index.tpl?db=3Dwebdna-talk >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
I just had a thought=85. If you're "eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]" string is looking up = client by a unique ID and you know that [aaa] will not be in either = FIELDyyy or FIELDzzz, then maybe you could still do the grouping this = way group1field=3Dfieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz&wagroup1datarq=3D[aaa] [bbb] between "fieldxxx+fieldyyy+fieldzzz", the search would have to find both = [aaa] and [bbb], right? On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Govinda wrote: > I am pretty sure I tried that (in the past), but, IIRC, grouping = fields does not work when you have other search params/criteria = *outside* of the grouped fields; grouped fields are only useful when = they are the only search criteria. >=20 > Thanks for replying. :-) >=20 > Anyone have any ideas? >=20 > Thanks > -Govinda >=20 > On 2011-08-29, at 10:02 AM, aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com wrote: >=20 >> It looks like a GroupFields in the search string would do the trick >>=20 >=20 >>> I need to find records that belong to a client (in a db full of = records for lots of clients), *AND* where a user-input string is found = in one of several other fields. >>>=20 >>> So... >>>=20 >>> I wish i had a good quick way (without loading a big RAM [table] = (which crash webdna when they get too large)) to effectively do this: >>>=20 >>> imaginary (sample) syntax: >>>=20 >>> [Search = db=3Dqqqqqq.db&eqTHIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIREDdatarq=3D[aaa]&eqFIELDyyydatarq1of2= =3D[bbb]&eqFIELDzzzdatarq2of2=3D[bbb]] >>> [!]--- >>> would return records where: >>> 1.) [THIS_FIELDxxx_REQUIRED] *necessarily = contained* "[aaa]" >>> *AND*=20 >>> 2.) *ANY* (*but at least one*) of these = conditions were met: >>> 2a.) [FIELDyyy] contained "[bbb]" >>> *OR* >>> 2b.) [FIELDzzz] contained "[bbb]" >>> ---[/!] >>> [/Search] >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Given version 6.02, How would you do this (without a [table])? >>>=20 >>> Thanks >>> -Govinda >=20 >=20 > - Govinda > -------------- > Old WebDNA talklist archives: > http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/index.tpl?db=3Dwebdna-talk >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
aaronmichaelmusic@gmail.com
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:
WebCatalog can't find database (1997)
HELP WITH DATES (1997)
Multiple database search (2000)
OT: 128 bit Encryption (2003)
Can I invoke an ssi plugin from within a webcat page (1997)
WebCatalog for Linux users!! (2000)
The force has left me. (2002)
Apache & XP - Problems Installing (2002)
Next X hits (1996)
[WebDNA] Off topic: ImageMagick (2008)
Help needed! (1998)
Search 1 Field Twice? (2004)
Crashing Server (2000)
[random] only for 1-100??? (1997)
Dubble Sku's in a Database (1999)
Dark Horse Comics success story (1997)
Customer - again (1998)
shipcost - cleaner with a table (1998)
[OT] Linux Vs. OSX (leopard) server (2007)
AccountAuthorizer doesn't seem to work (1997)