I have a InvoiceAccount field in table. And another field in this table is PackingSlipAXType. If PackingSlipAXType is Sales, InvoiceAccount field value is customer account. If type is PurchReturn, InvoiceAccount field value is vendor account.
When value is customer account, when right click and go to main table i want to go Customer
and
When value is vendor account, when right click and go to main table i want to go vendor.
How can i do this in same field?
There are two primary ways. One is code and the other is using native MorphX and Conditional Table Relations. Code gives you more flexibility, but conditional table relations are simpler and "just work".
Conditional Table Relations
Using conditional table relations. I created a new table and AccountNum would represent a customer or vendor account, and the base enum SalesPurch is used to indicate if it is a Customer Account (Sales) or a Vendor Account (Purch). Similar to your setup.
See conditional table relations - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamicsax-2012/developer/conditional-table-relations
See here for more info too.
Custom JumpRef & Lookup
You will likely want both a jumpRef and a lookup to both go to the correct main table and lookup the correct values.. This is code, but you have all the flexibility in the world...but may not need it.
Jumpref - https://community.dynamics.com/365/financeandoperations/b/faisalfareedaxlibrary/posts/ax-2012-how-to-use-jumpref-method
Lookup - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamicsax-2012/developer/how-to-add-a-lookup-form-to-a-control
Jumpref example at \Data Dictionary\Tables\TmpCostAllocationBase_RU\Methods\jumpRefAgreement
Lookup example at \Data Dictionary\Tables\TmpCostAllocationBase_RU\Methods\lookupAgreement
Related
In FSCM I am looking to modify the Search view on Add/Update PO page (Main Menu--> Purchasing--> Purchase Orders--> Add/Update POs) to display the Requisition ID associated with the PO in the search results page. The only table I have found that has both PO_ID and REQ_ID is PS_PO_LINE_DISTRIB however unless I use a SELECT DISTINCT clause I will get multiple PO_ID rows when there are more than 1 line on a PO.
Within Purchase Order Inquiry you can see the related Requisition ID's related to a PO by clicking on Document Status link inside the Purchase Order inquiry details page.
I started looking at the PeopleCode within the the Purchase Order Inquiry to see how they are linking the PO to a Requisition and it appears to use work tables with related PeopleCode function libraries, but I wasn't able to figure our how they get linked. I am hoping someone else may know the answer to this. Thank you.
I'm on an old version of PeopleSoft (SCM 8.80, Tools 8.51), so your mileage may vary. I'm assuming you're familiar with App Designer. If not, comment below and I'll add some details about what I'm clicking on.
Find the name of the Add/Update PO component.
Open the PURCHASE_ORDER component in App Designer. Now let's find the name of the search record. Note that there is a different record for the Add Search Record, so if you want to change that too, do all of this for that record as well.
Open the PO_SRCH record, and add the REQ_ID field to it. Make sure you mark the field as a key. You should consider saving your modified PO_SRCH under a new name in case you want to be able to revert to vanilla PeopleSoft. If you do, change the Search Record in the component to your new record name.
We can see that PO_SRCH is a view. So let's modify the view to pull in REQ_ID from PO_LINE_DISTRIB. As you mentioned above, there doesn't appear to be another table with both PO_ID and REQ_ID, so you'll have to do a SELECT DISTINCT.
We should do a LEFT OUTER JOIN instead of a standard join because if you do a standard join and you enter a purchase order with no lines and save it, then you'll never be able to retrieve that purchase order in this window. Since REQ_ID is a key field, we can't have a null, so we have to do the CASE.
One odd thing that I ran into here was building the view now gave me an error about selecting fewer columns in the SQL than I had in my record definition. I solved it by modifying the view for SQL Server. I've never had to do that before and I don't know why I had to do it for this specific record. But anyway, I entered the same SQL under the record's "Microsoft SQL Server" definition.
In the properties of PO_SRCH, we can see that it has a related language record. If you're only using one language, you can probably get away without changing this, but I'll do it for completeness. Open PO_SRCHLN. Now add REQ_ID to it (mark it as a key field like you did above), and save it as PO_SRCHLN2 (I'm saving it under a new name so I don't break anything else that may be using PO_SRCHLN).
Edit the SQL the same was as you did above. Note: I didn't have to also change the Microsoft SQL Server definition like I did above. I have no idea why.
Now build PO_SRCHLN2.
Go back to PO_SRCH and change its related language record to PO_SRCHLN2.
Now build PO_SRCH.
Hopefully you didn't get any errors and your search page has the requisition ID in it now. My system doesn't use requisitions so they're all blank in the example below, but the new field is there.
When opening the query SalesTableListPage from the AOT, you can choose the field MatchingAgreement (shown as "Agreement Header record ID (Record-ID)") in the field lookup. The same is not possible for query SalesUpdate, field MatchingAgreement and several others (which seem to be related to relation fields where the relation is built with a RecId) are not shown in the lookup.
After some research I found out that the reason seems to be the FetchMode property on the joined SalesLine data source. If it is 1:n, the fields are not shown in the lookup. If it is 1:1, the fields are shown in the lookup.
I have not tested this with other tables, but I suspect the same behavior. I also have only tested this with AX 2012 R2 and R3, but I suspect the same behavior in other 2012 versions.
Why does the FetchMode of a joined data source remove some fields from the parent data source in the query dialog?
TL;DR Field lookups in the query dialog do not always work for relation fields that define relations to tables where the AutoIdentification field group's property AutoPopulate is set to No. One case where they not work is when a data source is joined with FetchMode 1:n.
While Alex K's answer has some interesting suggestions, in my case the culprit is the AutoPopulate property on the AutoIdentification field group of table AgreementHeader. In sys layer, this property is set to No and the group contains the fields that are shown in the query dialog field lookup if the relation in the query is 1:1. If this property is switched is to Yes the lookup will show field Agreement header record ID (Record-ID) (and only this field, no matter how the FetchMode of the query relation is defined).
Basically, AX will use the information from the AutoIdentification field group to determine the information shown in the gui in case of surrogate key references/relations. If the AutoPopulate property of the field group is Yes, AX will use the alternate key of the table to determine the fields to use. If no alternate key exists (which is the case for table AgreementHeader), AX uses the relation field. If AutoPopulate is No, the fields defined in the group are used. But as described this option does not work if the relation in the query is not 1:1 (and unfortunately no fallback option like using the relation field seem to have been implemented).
FetchMode AutoPopulate Lookup
1:1 Yes AlternateKey (or Relation) fields
1:1 No AutoIdentification fields
1:n Yes AlternateKey (or Relation) fields
1:n No Nothing
Update:
I came upon this problem again, but with field SalesTaker this time. Turns out that the AutoPopulate property is only part of the story, because it did not solve the problem when set to Yes on table HcmWorker. This table (unlike table AgreementHeader) also has the property ReplacementKey set, which AX uses to populate the AutoIdentification field group. Only after I removed the ReplacementKey no fields appeared anymore in AutoIdentification and the lookup now showed "Sales taker (Record ID)". So bottom line is that the AutoIdentification field group must not contain any fields.
If the dynamic property of both query fields is set to yes, then I'd suspect it has something to do with the properties of one of these relations:
\Data Dictionary\Tables\SalesTable\Relations\Agreement
\Data Dictionary\Tables\SalesLine\Relations\SalesTable
Maybe try adjusting those, refreshing your cache (AOT changes to be picked up), clearing usage data (packed queries can cause problems), and updating XRef (Advanced querying uses XRef, so may not be necessary for standard query functionality)
I am trying to create a report putting a field called contact which has the name of a person. This name is linked directly to another table where I keep all the contacts.
For some strange reason, when I include this name (which in query view displays as the name of the contact), instead of the name appearing, the unique ID number is shown on my report.
As mentioned in the article cited in the above comment, you can use a Combo Box control on your report to do the lookup for you. To see how this can be done, create a new report based on the table containing the lookup field, then drag and drop that field onto the report. That will create a Combo Box control with properties that look something like this:
Row Source: SELECT [Clients].[ID], [Clients].[LastName] FROM Clients;
Bound Column: 1
Column Count: 2
Column Widths: 0";1"
You could use a similar Combo Box control on your actual report to display the client's name rather than their numeric ID value.
Another alternative would be to change the Control Source of the report's Text Box control to have it do a DLookUp() on the table. If the lookup field is named [client] then changing the Control Source of the Text Box to something like
=DLookUp("LastName","Clients","ID=" & [client])
would also work.
I wanted to add to the great answer by Gord:
When using a "web" database (started in Access 2007 I think), you cannot change a report's fields to ComboBox style, nor can you use DLookUp(). (web databases lack a ton of features)
The workaround for this, if you want to create a Web-Report that uses lookup fields, is to create a Web-Query first based on your Web-Table (all the Web-* stuff has a www planet icon over the logo, if you create a new Web-DB in Access 2007+ you'll see what I mean)
So, instead of Table -> Report, you'll have to do W-Table -> W-Query -> W-Report.
Then, the only thing you need to customize to get the data right is the W-Query. Start by trying to reproduce the look in the query to match what you want users to see in the report. Note that here in the query, lookups will work fine (instead of the unique ID's, you get field names like you want). However, this will not carry over to the report. To do that, you gotta get the actual text field name you want into the query:
You should already have one table in your query; start by adding the table that your first lookup field points to. For example, the table I want to print is called Stock_Boards, and it has a lookup field called PCBID_lookup that points to the table Stock_PCBs.
Since you're using lookup fields, there should already be a relationship line between the two tables when you add the second one. If there isn't, something has gone horribly wrong.
Now, see how that line connects two fields on the two different tables? For example, I've got my PCBID_lookup field on my Stock_Boards table, which connects to the ID field on my Stock_PCBs table. If I created a report from this now, PCBID_lookup would be a number, a number that correlates to the ID of a record on Stock_PCBs.
To fix it, I will add the name field I want to show up on the report. In my example, that happens to be a Part Number, rather than the ID. I add the PartNumber field from my Stock_PCBs table to the query, and remove the PCBID_lookup field of the Stock_Boards table from my query.
Since PartNumber is what I want to show up on my report, it effectively replaces the original field (PCBID_lookup)
Repeat for all lookup fields you want in your report.
I had 1 more: I removed the Status field of the Stock_Boards table (which was an ID/Lookup) and added the 'Status' field from the Status table (which was the actual text name)
When finished, your query should look exactly how you want the data to appear, without any special tricks or asking Access to do something unnatural. Save your query, and create a web-report from it. Done!
I'm building out a schema for a site that will need to store a product's currency. I'm not sure whether I'll be needing to be able to convert from one currency to another, however, I'm presuming that will probably be necessary. My db schema is below. (this is for a mobile app btw). My question is, should I just simplify things by adding an additional column called currency to my item table? Does my design make sense? Thank you.
Edit (based on reply from Victor below): the items have a many-to-many relationship with order table. How about putting the currency id on order table since most likely all items in an order will be in the same currency?
exchange_rates
id
currency_from
currency_to
ex_rate
item_currencies
currency_id
item_id (from items/products table)
currencies
id
code
symbol
The schema looks good but I think that the *item_currencies* table is not necessary.
In your items table you can just add the currency_id column. Keep it together with all the item properties :)
i'm using Drupal 6
I have this table relation and I've translated into CCK complete with it's relation.
Basically when I view a Period node, I have tabs to display ALL Faculty nodes combined with Presence Number.
here's the table diagram: http://i.stack.imgur.com/7Y5cU.png
Translated into CCK like these:
CCK Faculty (name),
CCK Period (desc,from,to) and
CCK Presence(node-reference-faculty, node-reference-period, presence_number)
Here's my simple manual SQL query that achieve this result: http://i.stack.imgur.com/oysd3.png
SELECT faculty.name, presence.presence_number FROM Faculty AS faculty
LEFT JOIN (SELECT * FROM Presence WHERE Period_id=1) AS presence ON faculty.id=presence.Faculty_id
The value of 1 for Period_id will be given by the Period Node ID from the url argument.
Now the hardest part, is simulating simple SQL query above into Views. How can I make such query into Views in Drupal-6 or Drupal-7 ?
thanks for any helps.
The main issue, which I think you've noticed, is that if you treat Faculty as the base for your join, then there is no way to join on the Presence nodes. Oppositely, if you treat Presence as the base, then you will not see faculties that have no presence number.
There is no easy way, using your currently defined structure, to do these joins in views.
I would say your easiest option is to remove the 'node-reference-faculty' field from the presence node and add a node-reference-presence field to the faculty. Since CCK fields can have multiple values, you can still have your one-to-many relationship properly.
The one downside of this is that then you need to manage the presence-faculty relationship from the faculty nodes instead of the presence nodes. If that's a show stopper, which it could be depending on your workflow, you could have BOTH node-reference fields, and use a module like http://drupal.org/project/backreference to keep them in sync.
Once you have your reference from faculty -> presence, you will need to add a relationship in Views. Just like adding a field or a filter, open the list of relationships and find the one for your node-reference field.
Next, you will need to add an argument for period id and set it up to use a node id from the url. The key thing is that when you add the argument, it will ask which relationship to use in its options. You will want to tell it to use your newly added presence relationship.
You don't really need to do a subquery in your SQL like that. This should be the same thing and won't make mysql try to create a temporary table. I mention it because you can't really do subqueries in Views unless you are writing a very custom Views handler, but in this case you don't really need the subquery anyway.
Ex.
SELECT f.name, p.presence_number
FROM Faculty AS f
LEFT JOIN Presence AS p ON f.id=p.Faculty_id
WHERE p.Period_id=1;
I wrote an article about how to achieve a similar outcome here. http://scottanderson.com.au/#joining-a-views-query-to-a-derived-table-or-subquery
Basically how to alter a Views query to left join on a sub-query.