Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'lookup table'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Caspio Bridge
    • General Questions
    • Caspio JavaScript Solutions
    • Tables, Views and Relationships
    • Import/Export and DataHub
    • DataPages
    • Deployment
    • Security, Authentications, Roles, SAML
    • Styles and Localizations
    • Parameters
    • API and Integration
    • Calculations and aggregations
    • User JavaScript and CSS Discussions

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Website URL






Found 6 results

  1. I have a rather complicated task that I'm trying to execute. This may take a bit of explaining. It references three lookup tables and two other tables. The point of this task is to set a number of days required to complete a specific task (Engineering, Welding, etc.) in a project. These days vary based on the unit size and type. Here is part of the table that I am using for reference so that you can understand what I'm working with. So for a job making a "Non Jacket Bin" that is under 500L, the Engineering task should take 5 days and the Weld task should take 10 days. Here is the task as I currently have it. So the table that this is updating is specifically for tracking the number of days required to complete each operation for a job line. It is connected to the job lines table via a Line Number. Right now I only have it updating the days it takes in Engineering but I will add Weld and more. That's why I have the joins in the Update statement and not the select - just to avoid redundancy. So first, it joins the days line number to the lines line number. Then it takes the unit size and joins it to a lookup table. This lookup table is used to convert the size to an integer. In the lines table it is written as "100L" so this join just allows for a value "Liters" to be used later which removes the L. The next join connects the Unit Type to another lookup table which will be used to find the general category the type is in ("Bin" rather than a code like "BINX"). Finally, this is joined to a table that is similar to the one pictured above. Here is part of that table for reference: (The days are the days before the ship date) The Unit Size refers to anything that is less than or equal to that number. Thus, why my join is on Liters >= Unit Size. I then sort the select by the unit size ASC which should connect Liters to the smallest Unit size without going over. Instead, what I get is all units, regardless of size, assigned the smallest days. What am I doing wrong? Any help would be appreciated!
  2. So I'm trying to make a trigger so that when new data is inserted/updated in my table it checks that the address doesn't match any existing addresses for that Customer and if not, it stores the address in a lookup table for easier inputting in the future. This is the trigger I set up but it isn't working. Anyone know a better way to do this?
  3. my one authentication is built from a view based on a user_ table. when i build a report from that view, all fields present their expected values, that is, they show the values that are in the user_ table. however, when i build an HTML page and select authentication fields for embed (using the 'insert parameter' feature), not all fields present their expected values. for instance: [@authfield: user__first_name] prints out the user's first name on the HTML page and [@authfield: user__last_name] prints out the user's last name on the HTML page and even [@authfield: user__display_name] (which is a function that concatenates the first and last name) prints out the user's first name on the HTML page HOWEVER [@authfield: user__original_user_id] displays nothing even though it has a text field value of IAQM6XBX in the user table (upon which the authentication view is built, and, again, which prints out just fine in a tabular report built from that view) AND [@authfield: user__has_a_pool] displays nothing even though the text field has a value of 'Y' in the user table, and even though it prints out just fine in the tabular report built from the view. the only theory i have for why this might be is that the fields that are displaying nothing did not exist when the table was first created; they were later added. that is, i suspect that some caspio features don't update after initial creation (such as authentication view fields). i have created new views based on the updated table, but that hasn't helped. the only thing i haven't tested is creating a whole new table, which i am loathe to do. a perhaps related issue is that i have noted that when i change / add fields in tables - and ensure that those changes are duly reflected in the views that they participate in - datapage lookups for those views still do not reflect the changes in the table fields. in other words, if i were to change 'field ABC' to 'field XYZ' in a table, i can confirm that the change is reflected in view. however, when i select that view as a lookup table for a datapage's dropdown field, i will still see 'field ABC' and not see 'field XYZ'. that is, it is as if the original blueprint of the table/view is preserved. so, any thoughts? thanks for reading this far.
  4. i have changed / added / renamed fields in some tables. i have checked the views which use those tables, and have ensured that the changes are reflected in the view (e.g. ensured that 'include all fields' is checked). however, whenever i use a VIEW for a datapage, the 'datasource' fields that are available for record-level security or for lookup tables in dropdown elements show only the old fields and the old field names. the only way to see the correct fields is to use the table as the datasource, but of course that shouldn't be the case. all this is to say, it seems that dropdowns in datapages for lookup tables and record -level security are using cached versions of the original view/table. a screenshot is tough to pull off, but perhaps this example will help: current table fields: field ABC (originally named field AB) field XYZ (not originally in table or view) current view fields (match table, as expected): field ABC field XYZ fields available for dropdowns and record-level security in datapages (does not match table; unexpected behavior): field AB (not field ABC, and not field XYZ)
  5. I have a tabular report containing afield that has a lookup table associated with it (1 to many relationship). How do I do a search in the table for rows that have a value that is contained in a lookup table. E.g.I have lookup table of Department ID & Department name. In my tabular report of employees with Employee ID, Employee Name, Department ID (each employee belongs to a particular department) I want to search for Employees belonging to a department, using the department name rather than Department ID. And I want the search to be able to use "Contains" e.g. bring up all Employees with "Admin" in the Department name, as there are a number of Departments with "Admin" as part of their name. e.g. Postal Admin, Finance Admin. Apologies if it's a rookie question !
  6. I have a lookup table that lists several (around 20) items to check off in a to-do list where the table is named “todo†with fields setup as todo_Num (integer), todo_Item(integer) todo_Desc(text) and todo_Cat(text). I also have a “todo_complete†table with the fields of Comp_Num (integer), todo_num(integer), Fin(checkbox) and Explain(text). I have been able to setup a submission form with virtual1 field displaying the todo Descriptions in a dropdown with 2virt fields cascading the todo_Num and todo_Item, from todo_desc then linking to the todo_complete table. Unfortunately the dropdown and listbox do not display the desired user experience. I would like to list all todo items displayed as a check-off list. Where after checking an item on the list, the user can fill out an explanation of actions taken and that the item has been repaired. I have been able to show the full todo table rows in a report form (much cleaner) but am unable to pass the [@todo_Item] (and/or the other parameters) to the "todo_Comp" table submit form in an Iframe. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated. I had originally used the example as shown in the "Build an Inspections Management Application" http://howto.caspio.com/pre-recorded-live-training/build-an-inspections-management-application/ unfortunately Neds solution does not allow the option of adding tasks to the list without going into the Inspections table and creating new fields for that task. I also believe this structure would fail normalization in my situation, with multiple fields being dependent of others in the table. (for example the fields.. todo_Item, Number_of_Light_Bulbs_Broken and Action_Taken would be associated with each other). Much cleaner to hold the results in a separate "todo_complete" table.
  • Create New...