Edit Tables (OpenInsight Specific)
At 07 MAY 1998 05:17:48PM David Kirch wrote:
I have attached a Arev table and am trying to set up a OI form for it. All Fields are data typed (varchar) including the symbolic's. I have a MV field and a MV Symbolic that fills an Arev screen but when I try to use an EDITTABLE to display the same way (by appending a column and setting the DATABASE ASSOCIATION to the symbolic). When I try to save or run the screen it tells me that I can not save.
Ps. OI is a hilly road. It's slow going up and Fast coming down.
At 07 MAY 1998 06:47PM Jeff Blinn wrote:
I have attached a Arev table and am trying to set up a OI form for it. All Fields are data typed (varchar) including the symbolic's. I have a MV field and a MV Symbolic that fills an Arev screen but when I try to use an EDITTABLE to display the same way (by appending a column and setting the DATABASE ASSOCIATION to the symbolic). When I try to save or run the screen it tells me that I can not save.
Sounds like the same problem we had. Turn off the 'Maintain Database Columns in Repository' option under the Application properties. When this option is on, you get the unable to save message on a form that has an edit table with more than one field.
Jeff
At 08 MAY 1998 06:32AM Jeff Word wrote:
We have this option turned off too. Please look at my question titled "Updating customers with new dictionary items" and "Tables with no history". I would appreciate your input.
At 08 MAY 1998 12:06PM Jeff Blinn wrote:
We have this option turned off too. Please look at my question titled "Updating customers with new dictionary items" and "Tables with no history". I would appreciate your input.
Jeff,
I'm not sure I can add anything more to what Cam, Aaron and others have given you on repository entries/history. As far as deploying new dictionary items - our situation may be different than yours, in that we are developing in house applications. Once the application is deployed, I can attach the production files from the development system to add/modify dictionary items directly - which seems to be working well so far. This also solves difficulties we've had in deploying/adding indexes.
Jeff