Jump to content


Caspio Guru
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


NiceDuck last won the day on August 2

NiceDuck had the most liked content!


About NiceDuck

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Normally, I would rather use the not exist operator to check if the record does not exist yet. Just like this. I try using "Not in" before but I encounter some errors so I prefer using this more
  2. I Also want to suggest ths workflow, I made this one before but I kindof forgot the details. I hope this helps Email Authentication.docx
  3. My idea is, create a submission form that will automatically submit this data to a separate table. 1) create a table with the following field: ID (any id field, just for normalization), DP name (text 255) Visitor (text 255) 2)Then create a submission form that will use the table above as its data source, include all the the fields and set them up to load default values from parameter. 3) Use an auto submit JS to make this form... auto submit. 4) Now, Embed this as an iframe to all of your DataPage (preferably on footer). On the URL of your embed code, make sure that you inc
  4. Your intended workflow appears to be doable. If I got it correctly, our overall intentions here is to apply the changes made on table A to table B. On this case, you will need an update trigger on table a that will then also update the table b. This is the basic: This will only work ofcourse if your tables have optimal relation between each other but I can say much since I do not know the exact design of your tables. I hope it helps
  5. I noticed that one as well. For now, what I did is I made a dummy datapage to host that image for me, then from there, right click on the image then select the 'get image address'. You will then have a URL which you may now use for the image on authentication instead of pulling it from app parameter itself. image on authentication.docx
  6. I think we dont need the whoe "if Then block" if you place the conditional statement on the join field itself: The join also acts as a condition statement and using an if then block on your case appears to be a kind of redundant filtering. I hope this helps
  7. You may also want to check your view filtering. please see this article as well: https://howto.caspio.com/tables-and-views/what-are-views/creating-a-view-to-filter-data/
  8. What I could suggest does not have a dropdown, but 5 yes no fields (one for each option), then we can make a triggered action to make seperate entries per selected options on a different table. Basically, first table will just be a dummy table for intaking records but the actual records will be created and saved on different table via triggered action.
  9. Uhmmm I have a suggestions, since you are using the same criteria on the join and the where, you can remove those at the 'Where' clause. I think the filtering is getting redundant since the Join kindof acts as a filter as well.
  10. HMMMM I suggest that we use a seperate table then use a task/triggered action to copy values there that has second records... Then use that table as the datasource of this chart instead. We can also add a single field on your table and use task/trigger to mark records that has a second. Then on your filtering for the DataPage, filter it to only include those that are marked
  11. If you no longer need the list string field and you just wanted to salvage its content or you just need to do this for 1 time only, I suggest that you convert it to text255. The list string contents of it will become a comma separated values instead. Once you are done transferring, you can change it back to list string again.
  12. @peewee It is indeed a current Caspio Limitation, what I could suggest at the moment is instead of using list data types, just create multiple yes-no fields. It may be difficult to set up properly on forms but it would help us properly for the automation using triggered action and task
  13. If I got your inquiry correct, you want to limit the values the user can search depending on your parameter. Is that the case? If yes, I could suggest using a cascading elements. What we will need to do is set a virtual field and set it to hidden and make it load default value from parameter. Then, set your proper search fields as cascading elements using the virtual field as its parent. This workflow will require a custom lookup table where you will need to set which record is related to your parameters and which value shall appear only on your search field. I hope you got the
  14. @BertM If the creation of child records will originate from creating parent record as well, you can use this trigger on the parent table. If you dont have an update trigger on the parent table, this should work properly with @AtayBalunbalunan's trigger. Otherwise, you would have an cascading error. @AtayBalunbalunan, thank you for the tip about getting the count, I did not know that you can get the count of records with just the 'expression field', I thought that a group function is required for that.
  15. You also need to avoid inserting a record on the table where your trigger resides if its event is set to "Insert", same for the update or delete. This will cause a recursion error which like the trigger effects are triggering itself causing a loop.
  • Create New...