[AccessD] Upsizing (was: Desperately Seeking!)

Gustav Brock gustav at cactus.dk
Sun May 4 11:29:25 CDT 2003


Hi Arthur

> You've omitted the third case, where say Faculty = 'FB' and School = 'BM'.
> Some users cannot see their whole faculty, just their school.

That's what I suspected - but the second case will return True for those
records of a given Faculty no matter what School ... ??

/gustav


> Hi Arthur

> Haven't followed this thread closely, but wonder how:

>>         Faculty_ID = @Faculty_ID AND School_ID = @School_ID
>>         OR
>>         Faculty_ID = @Faculty_ID
>>         OR
>>         @Faculty_ID = 'All'

> would differ from:

>>         Faculty_ID = @Faculty_ID
>>         OR
>>         @Faculty_ID = 'All'

> /gustav


>> Glad you noticed and glad to share it. It's just one of those 
>> slaps-aside-the-head that we occasionally need. In this case, it's the 
>> assumption that you test parms against column values. But suppose you 
>> reject this notion. Case in recent point, there are two columns called 
>> Faculty_ID and School_ID, so that the permutations might be something 
>> like this:

>> FB      BM
>> FB      All
>> All     All

>> The "scope" values are in a table called tblUsers. You grab the values 
>> for the current user from there and apply them to a single sproc that 
>> covers all cases. Like so:

>> SELECT * FROM someTable(s)
>> WHERE
>>         Faculty_ID = @Faculty_ID AND School_ID = @School_ID
>>         OR
>>         Faculty_ID = @Faculty_ID
>>         OR
>>         @Faculty_ID = 'All'

>> This grabs all possible combinations.

>> The point is, you can test parms against values rather than column 
>> contents, as in the last line.


>> A.

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
>> Sent: May 3, 2003 2:08 PM
>> To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
>> Subject: RE: [AccessD] Upsizing (was: Desperately Seeking!)


>> Arthur,

>> The scenario I described is pretty much limited to a LAN situation, 
>> not a WAN.  I can see why a WAN database may work better with an 
>> unbound database.

>> But what I really am calling about is the "All" argument.  Could you 
>> replay with an example?  This sounds like it could be really valuable.



More information about the AccessD mailing list