ContributionsMost RecentMost LikesSolutionsRE: Introducing Pipelines - Webinar Q&AHow will the modified timestamp fields for QB records produced/modified by this feature (i.e. Last Modified By, Record Owner, etc.) be handled when utilizing pipeline actions? Will they always use the pipeline creator's username like how automations currently work, or will it be possible to define that value in the pipeline setup either through use of a user field or some hard-coded value (similar to how connected tables use "Connected Data Service" as the Record Owner). With the potential of heavy record manipulation with pipelines, I'd prefer not to have my name plastered over all of our QB records when I am not actually making these record additions/edits myself. ------------------------------ Jonathan Klein ------------------------------ Is there a way to allow for users to view the Users table without granting them the ability to ""Manage Users""?I would like to grant users of a certain role the ability to view the list of Users registered within the app. However, I do not want them to be able to "manage" the users (change roles, invite new users, etc). I merely want them to be able to see those who are registered within the app; essentially a "view-only" version of the Users page. Is this possible? Or are there any workarounds that anyone has come up with?Re: Allow Both Record Picker And Manual Entry For Relationship Reference FieldYeah there are thousands of records involved, so its forced into record-picker mode. I'll have to see whether they are okay with this setup or if they'd rather stick with record-picker-only, but I think I'm going to try your original suggestion with a little twist. Here's what I'm thinking: The [data entry] and [record-picker] fields will be placed side by side on the form within the same section by themselves to highlight the fact they go together. Then using form rules I'll make it so that when the [record-picker] is used and an item is selected it will populate the [data entry] field then immediately clear itself. So the result regardless of how the value was entered will always be a populated [data entry] field, an empty [record-picker] field, and populated lookup fields (assuming a valid entry was entered). Conceptually it's sort of like how date fields have that little calendar button within them that you can click on to bring up a selection popup and then once something is selected it populates the field's entry portion. Ideally I'd have more control over the form and turn the [record-picker] field into a little box or something and place it flush against the [data entry] field to better mimic that, but I suppose this will have to do. Hopefully that made sense. Then for validation I'd just have a rule that looks at a resulting lookup field and if there's no data in the lookup field then I can assume that an invalid value was entered and prevent the save from occurring. A bit messier than I'd like, but we'll see what they go for. Thanks for the suggestion.Re: Allow Both Record Picker And Manual Entry For Relationship Reference FieldThat's an interesting workaround, though I'm not sure if it will completely solve what I'm looking for. If I do it this way, wouldn't the [Direct Entry] field then not have any kind of validation to it since it is not connected to the parent records? What I'm aiming for is essentially the same thing as the multiple-choice dropdown where while you have the ability to manually enter a value, its still limited to the items in the multiple-choice list. Though I suppose I could possibly add some kind of form rule or something to validate the field.... Either way, wouldn't this require two fields on the form? One for manual entry ([Direct Entry]) and another for the record-picker ([Related Parent Regular Method]). I'm building the app for users who are not the most tech-savvy to begin with and I imagine having two fields for the same input value will most likely confuse them.Allow Both Record Picker And Manual Entry For Relationship Reference FieldI have a form with a reference field that opens up a record picker (search/selection) box. However users want to be able to simply manually enter a value without having to go through the process of opening a dialog box, searching for that value, and then selecting it. That search/select feature should still be available for those who are not sure of which value to enter, but those who do know would like to be able to essentially skip those steps and simply enter in the value into the box. Is there some way to accomplish this? Normal multiple-choice dropdown lists have this capability (where you can just type and it auto-fills a valid value as you type), but I cannot seem to find something similar for a reference field. I've tried using the "Use a record picker instead of a drop down menu" property, but it behaves as a record picker regardless of that setting (probably because there are so many records). Re: API_DoQuery Not Pulling Records In JavascriptSorry for the late reply, but thanks for the correction; my script now pulls the right data when using periods. I'm curious though as to how the second query example ({'3',GT,'0'}) managed to work fine whereas the first one returned nothing despite both utilizing commas.API_DoQuery Not Pulling Records In JavascriptI am having difficulties with utilizing the API_DoQuery through javascript. Essentially any time I specify a query that involves field ID's other than the record ID, it returns no records. The following is the URL used that is NOT returning records: https://targetdomain.quickbase.com/db/targetdbid?act=API_DoQuery&query={'31',EX,'ALE'}AND{'6',EX,'Q1318'}&clist=31.6.8.23.25.26&slist=8&apptoken=targetapptoken&fmt=structured I've checked over and over that these are the appropriate field ID's and values, and that records exists that match this criteria; however, the request finds nothing. Now this URL DOES return records: https://targetdomain.quickbase.com/db/targetdbid?act=API_DoQuery&query={'3',GT,'0'}&clist=31.6.8.23.25.26&slist=8&apptoken=targetapptoken&fmt=structured and the resulting XML has records with <f id="31">ALE</f> <f id="6">Q1318</f> Is there something I am missing? I've even tried doing the first query separately rather than as a compound and that still returned nothing. Any ideas as to why the query isn't working? Re: Changing the fields being pulled in an already existing Quickbase connection between tables from different apps?Ah, I completely missed this. Thanks for the info.Changing the fields being pulled in an already existing Quickbase connection between tables from different apps?In one application, I have a table that is pulling data from a separate application using a Quickbase Connection. This connection was initially set up to pull certain fields, but now I need to change which fields are being pulled. I do not see a way to edit the list of fields being pulled (you can change the filter, and the refresh settings, but not the actual fields from what I can see). Does anyone know how this can be done without deleting the entire table and making a new one from scratch?