johnsodolak
asked on
Effectively a sort of Sub-Summary Serial# applicable to IWP
In my database I have a table named "Property" which contains a field named "PropID" which is a autoenter serial number which will apply a unique identifier to each specific record.
Each record contains the field "Lands" which is not a unique field among the remaining records. I am interested in finding a way to create a sort of "sub-summary" serial id according to the groupings of "Lands" records.
For example, if I have the following records:
Serial# Description Sub-Summary Serial#
PropID01 LandsA LandsA1
PropID02 LandsA LandsA2
PropID03 LandsA LandsA3
PropID04 LandsA LandsA4
PropID05 LandsB LandsB1
PropID06 LandsB LandsB2
PropID07 LandsB LandsB3
PropID08 LandsC LandsC1
PropID09 LandsD LandsD1
PropID10 LandsD LandsD2
There are two major issues. (1) The process/calc must be applicable to a database that is IWP and (2) the sub-summary serial number must be static b/c there is a possibility that a record's status will require that it be deleted, therfore, simply using a count function will not solve my issue.
I thank you in advance for all of your help and will reward points/grades quickly for any solution I receive that solves my problem.
Each record contains the field "Lands" which is not a unique field among the remaining records. I am interested in finding a way to create a sort of "sub-summary" serial id according to the groupings of "Lands" records.
For example, if I have the following records:
Serial# Description Sub-Summary Serial#
PropID01 LandsA LandsA1
PropID02 LandsA LandsA2
PropID03 LandsA LandsA3
PropID04 LandsA LandsA4
PropID05 LandsB LandsB1
PropID06 LandsB LandsB2
PropID07 LandsB LandsB3
PropID08 LandsC LandsC1
PropID09 LandsD LandsD1
PropID10 LandsD LandsD2
There are two major issues. (1) The process/calc must be applicable to a database that is IWP and (2) the sub-summary serial number must be static b/c there is a possibility that a record's status will require that it be deleted, therfore, simply using a count function will not solve my issue.
I thank you in advance for all of your help and will reward points/grades quickly for any solution I receive that solves my problem.
I'm not sure I understand the need for the Sub-Summary Serial#. Can this not be done with a couple of TOs and a relationship?
ASKER
??? TOs and a relationship???
What I am trying to do is effectively give each record a unique identifier per its group. That grouping being defined by the "Lands/Description" field, as illustrated in the example.
I am not sure that "sub-summary" is the correct terminology. I simply used the term b/c in a report I can group these records according to adding a sub-summary part. Using that thought process, say I ran a sub-summary report for the above example, each of those groups would be defined. Now I would want each of those records in the group to have an identifier or key that would reflect that it is part of that group (i.e. LandA#), but that will still make that record unique (i.e. LandA1, LandA2, etc.).
What I am trying to do is effectively give each record a unique identifier per its group. That grouping being defined by the "Lands/Description" field, as illustrated in the example.
I am not sure that "sub-summary" is the correct terminology. I simply used the term b/c in a report I can group these records according to adding a sub-summary part. Using that thought process, say I ran a sub-summary report for the above example, each of those groups would be defined. Now I would want each of those records in the group to have an identifier or key that would reflect that it is part of that group (i.e. LandA#), but that will still make that record unique (i.e. LandA1, LandA2, etc.).
TO = Table Occurrence. Relationship is what joins two TOs together.
Here is a very simple example where you have a relationship from Property to itself using the Description field. As a result you can see all the serial numbers that are related to that description. This seems to be a better way, as the serial number is the KEY to that record without having to produce some other identifier.
Take a look and see if this helps or if I've totally missed the whole point. :-)
Property.fp7
Here is a very simple example where you have a relationship from Property to itself using the Description field. As a result you can see all the serial numbers that are related to that description. This seems to be a better way, as the serial number is the KEY to that record without having to produce some other identifier.
Take a look and see if this helps or if I've totally missed the whole point. :-)
Property.fp7
ASKER
I apologize! I did understand what a relationship what, I was simply not sure what "TO" was and how it related to "relationship." I do know what a table occurrence is also.
You are correct that I do need to have a unique identifier/key for every record, but, for reporting/output purposes and "spatial" analysis I need to have a second identifier.
Your .fp7 example is right along the lines of what I already have. The only difference is that I need a third field that will restart/reset the numbering system w/in each "group" (i.e. LandA, LandB, LandC). Essentially resetting my numbering system for each group.
You are correct that I do need to have a unique identifier/key for every record, but, for reporting/output purposes and "spatial" analysis I need to have a second identifier.
Your .fp7 example is right along the lines of what I already have. The only difference is that I need a third field that will restart/reset the numbering system w/in each "group" (i.e. LandA, LandB, LandC). Essentially resetting my numbering system for each group.
OK, and you are thinking that if I have LandA3 and LandA4 they will never change. If I were to delete LandA3, LandA4 would still remain and a new item in that same group would be LandA5. Is this correct?
ASKER
Yes North2Alaska, that is absolutely correct!
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Thanks jvaldes, I will try this and get back w/ you!
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ok with me
This question has been classified as abandoned and is being closed as part of the Cleanup Program. See my comment at the end of the question for more details.