SLX 7.5.2 web new lookup by fields

[apfingstl]

Hi All,

We created a new field CustomerNumber in a 1-1 extension table of account.

What are the correct steps to enable users to search for this accountnumber field?

Thanks! Alexander

[apfingstl]

OK, it now works.

Here is what you need:

- Add the new columns to your standard lookup group

- Make sure this group is selected under the options tab

What we needed to do is log off and log in again.

Alexander

[ToddHardin]

On a related note - my preference is to NOT use 1:1 tables to add fields to base tables, insted just add the field to the base tables as much cleaner user, customizations, group defs, MailMerge templates, Crystal reports, etc. - also less performance overhead as no join needed. Finally, no concern about missing 1:1 records (for any reason) that cause inner joins tonot return expected records.

[LEsposito]

I thought adding 1-1 Extension Tables was a recommended Best Practice and that adding fields to the Core Tables a no-no!

Thanks,
Larry Esposito

[RJLedger]

As part of performance improvements we recommend to start moving the 1:1 stuff back into the main table(s) and start dropping those 1:1.

You could officially add to the "core" at version 7.0 - BUT there's a process you can employ to do it to any prior version and not break things.

We started doing it to our customer's db's at 5.0 ;-) 

So, as part of cleaning up the db, time to start planning and moving fields/data. It will let you drop some code here and there as well. Make it lean and mean! 

[LEsposito]

Any documented guidelines from Sage like max number of fields in a table or C_ prefix for field names?

Thanks,
Larry Esposito

[apfingstl]

Hi Todd,

As many standard tables are set to readonly (which can be changed) I started in the past to use my own tables.

This also gives me full control of it.

I am a little frightend that Sage will do changes to the table which might effect my custom fields.

So that is why I am still sticking to the extra table solution.

Alexander

[RJLedger]

Max fields/record size are determined by the DB (SQL/Oracle) itself.

We had a long discussion in the partner NG some time back on the "C_" thing.. for me.. I never bother. You can document (and you should) that the field is custom in the properties of the field in the DB manager.

If you are worried about field name "clashes" w/SalesLogix, that is the least of your worries. Tablename clashes are far more severe and much harder to deal with. If SalesLogix adds a field w/the same name in an SP or HF it's probably doing the same function yours is.

[RJLedger]

Alexander, all they could do is add a field with the exact same name.

Don't worry about it. The mess 1:1 tables have caused over the years is not worth having them in the system. 

I've been modifying the core tables since 5.0 days and never ran into any issues, never a clash.

Time to make life a lot easier and abandon the 1:1 tables. In addition you should see much better db performance!  No junky inner joins forced on you!

[LEsposito]

Sweet!