selection set with dates on diff fields don't work

[Dennis Malen]

Richard,

I rebuilt the auto index for field 5 and now it works.

Thanks for your help.

Regards,

Dennis Malen
----- Original Message -----
From: "GCC Consulting" <gcc at optonline.net>
To: "'Dennis Malen'" <dmalen at malen.com>; "'Kenneth Brody'"
<kenbrody at bestweb.net>
Cc: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 8:00 PM
Subject: RE: selection set with dates on diff fields don't work


> Dennis,
>
> Why not use both in sort/select processing?  If the date passes field 97
then
> test field 5.  Passing  both, select, otherwise end.
>
> Richard Kreiss
> GCC Consulting
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of Dennis
Malen
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 1:07 PM
> To: Kenneth Brody
> Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Re: selection set with dates on diff fields don't work
>
> Ken,
>
> If  I use the selection set with field 5 only and delete field 97 it chose
a
> record that contained a field 5 date of "04/04/19" and field 2 of  "0642".
>
> The same result when I use field 97 only, I got "05/13/04" with the
appropriate
> field 2 selection.
>
> In both cases I receive more than one response which met the selection
criteria
> in each instance.
>
> I can't figure this one out. The selection format is used in inquire,
update and
> add. I also have a report where I initially attempted to use this
selection
> format (that's why I experimented in rclerk) and it did not work.What I
have
> done on the report is to put processing in that would look for field 5 in
the
> selected record while using field 97 in the selection format and does not
> recognize field 5 in the processing. For some reason it does select those
> records which fall into the selection format (date field
> 97 only) but does not seem to recognize the condition created for date
field
> 5 in the processing
>
> Remeber field 5 is a date field "ymd/" and 97 is "mdy/". Could this be the
> problem. In the selection format different date edits can not coexist. It
> doesn't make any sense but that is what happens. If the dates are used
uniquely
> in both the selection format and to processing table, then it works.
Otherwise
> it does not.
>
> I don't want to confuse the issue with the report format but that is how I
got
> to the selection format in dclerk to test what it was doing. So let's just
stick
> with the selection format in dclerk as opposed to being sidetracked by the
> processing in rreport even though the same thing happens in the processing
> table.
>
> Dennis Malen
> 516.479.5912
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kenneth Brody" <kenbrody at bestweb.net>
> To: "Dennis Malen" <dmalen at malen.com>
> Cc: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 6:42 PM
> Subject: Re: selection set with dates on diff fields don't work
>
>
> > Dennis Malen wrote:
> > >
> > > Here's an interesting one. The following is a selection set where
> records in
> > > the file should meet the selection criteria but filepro does not
> > > select
> the
> > > record as meeting that criteria.
> > >
> > >        :  97 : Date Status Changed     ge :   03/21/04
> > > a      :  2  : Client#                               :   0593
> > > a      :  2  : Client#                               :   0594
> > > a      :  2  : Client#                               :   0642
> > >         :  5  : Date Assigned                ge :   04/04/08
> > >
> > > Field 97 has an edit of mdy/ and filed 5 has an edit of ymd/.
> > >
> > > If fields 97 and 5 are used separately its works fine. When both are
> used as
> > > above they select nothing. Am I restricted from using two different
> > > date selections on two different fields?
> > [...]
> >
> > Assuming you have a record whose client# is any of 0593/0594/0642, has
> > a status changed date of 21-Mar-04 or later, and has an assigned date
> > of 8-Apr-04 or later, then the above should work.
> >
> > Can you give examples of actual data that "work" when using either
> > date field but not when using both?
> >
> > --
> >
> +-------------------------+--------------------+------------------------
> +-------------------------+--------------------+----
> -+
> > | Kenneth J. Brody        | www.hvcomputer.com |
> |
> > | kenbrody at spamcop.net | www.fptech.com     | #include
> <std_disclaimer.h> |
> >
> +-------------------------+--------------------+------------------------
> +-------------------------+--------------------+----
> -+
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
>
>
>