Selection criterion question

[John Esak]

<top post about lookup ->
I might as well throw $.02 worth in here.
When I first developed the use of "lookup -" on a sort/selection table, it
changed the way I did every -v table for months and years afterward... even
up through today. And, of course, almost everyone has adopted the technique
as SOP for speed. Very gratifying. And, certainly for culling out a group of
numbers or groups of groups of numbers in a large database, it is still the
fastest way to do it. (Replace group for range if you like.) But, if all you
want to do is run through the index in an efficient way (either in report or
clerk) check out the PFIXS variable and what it does for you... It provides
an all-the-time speed up of things. Or, start to use -j on the command line
more often.  The increases in speed are purely phenomenal, and may be all
you need rather than always writing a "lookup -" sort/select.

Second, while it used to be necessary to put a global variable (,,g) into
AUTOMATIC processing and use it to take input on a sort/select table so you
could then print the obtained value on the output format, I haven't done
this in years. All you need to do is "declare global variable(,,g)" on the
sort/selection table, use it to obtain the criteria from the user, and
"declare extern same_variable" on the output table to be able to print these
values on the output format. (Fill in a size and edit type for the ",,g" I'm
showing here of course.)  Once you've got the variable declared extern on
the output format, just assign it to a 2 character (or 1 hcaracter)
old-style dummy variable there and you can print it without problem. This,
means you can eliminate the AUTOMATIC table entirely for this purpose.

John Esak




nal Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com]On
> Behalf Of Bruce Easton
> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 11:46 AM
> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: RE: Selection criterion question
>
>
> Top post,
>
> Yes, Richard's addition is true and useful information, and
> required for use
> with the lookup - technique to speed up reporting, but Tom, just
> so you are
> clear, the lookup dash technique and the index letter on a script line are
> not required to just get the selection dates on  your report (to
> answer your
> original question) - just the steps below where you use the same dummy
> fields on the form, auto, selection and output processing and the script
> line, as I indicated below (and for my example, since I did not use a -z
> <outputprcname> flag, the output processing would need to be the same name
> as the output format to work).
>
> Bruce
>
> Bruce Easton
> STN, Inc.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: GCC Consulting [mailto:gccconsulting at comcast.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:18 AM
> >
> > Top post,
> >
> > If you are using - lookup, you need to indicate the index being
> used with
> > the - lookup on the command line (-in n indicating the index to
> > use).  Also,
> > you need -a which is select all records.
> >
> > /appl/fp/dreport myfilename -f formatname -v sortseltablename -a -in -y
> > myautotablename
> >
> >
> > Richard Kreiss
> > GCC Consulting
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:
> > > filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial
> > > .com
> > > [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.c
> > elestial.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Easton
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 4:49 PM
> > > To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > > Subject: RE: Selection criterion question
> > >
> > > Bruce Easton wrote Wed 2/14/2007 4:14 PM:
> > >
> > > > Tom Carey wrote Wed 2/14/2007 1:42 PM:
> > > >> [..]
> > > >> Is there a way to have the date range selection criteria
> > > print on the
> > > >> report?
> > > >> [..]
> > > >
> > > > Tom - others have indicated sort/selection processing and some good
> > > > ideas related to speeding up your reports using lookup dash
> > > (which is
> > > > probably indicated for your application since you are
> > > reporting for a
> > > > recent period of time and as time goes by your report will
> > > take longer
> > > > and longer to run as it reads through all your history of records),
> > > > but to just satisfy your question, you should have:
> > > >
> > > > 1. a sort/selection table where you ask the user begin/end dates -
> > > > declared globally.
> > > >
> > > > 2. an automatic table that declares the same begin and end
> > > date dummy
> > > > fields (bd and ed - this allows other processing tables to see the
> > > > values that were set for those fields in the sort/selection table).
> > > >
> > > > 3. in your current output table, also declare the same date fields.
> > > >
> > > > 4. use the same dummy fields on your form.
> > > >
> > > > Bruce
> > >
> > > Tom, I should have added a sample of a executable report line
> > > to make use of the various prc tables:
> > >
> > > /appl/fp/dreport myfilename -f myformatname -v
> > > mysortseltablename  -y myautotablename
> > >
> > > To make this work as desired, this indicates that you would
> > > need to start using this report from a script of some sort or
> > > from a filepro menu option, and not by running the report
> > > from "Request Output" on the "filePro Plus Main Menu."
> > >
> > > Hmmm - WISHLIST wondering.  Maybe someone already asked for
> > > this - what if on output forms, you could optionally allow on
> > > the options screen:
> > >
> > > 1. a sort/selection prc table name and
> > > 2. an index letter (for filepro's read records phase)
> > >
> > > then these would be used (even over anything on the script
> > > line) and would thus in many cases eliminate the need for -v
> > > and the read index letter and would cause such reports to
> > > work even from a default-install dpromenu.  For that matter
> > > why not allow an auto and final output prc table to be named
> > > on the format as well.  Of course it's just another level of
> > > hiding something when you may be looking for it. :)  Okay,
> > > enough wondering.
> > >
> > > Bruce
> > >
> > > Bruce Easton
> > > STN, Inc.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Filepro-list mailing list
> > > Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > > http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list