ContributionsMost RecentMost LikesSolutionsPipeline efficiency -- one or many?Hi: I'm just getting started in pipelines. I've got the basic concept. One question I have is the most efficient options for some of my pipeline ideas for use in the Quickbase channel. I have essentially one trigger (record created) that will then add up to 5 "result" records in a separate table. Each "result" is slightly different, but the bulk of the information remains the same (out of currently about 40 fields, only 4 change in each of those up to 5 "results"). I anticipate the pipeline will usually create 1-3 records, with the average close to 2 or a little under. Later on, for each of those possible 5 result records, I'll need pipelines to handle updates and deletions. Dealing only with the create record pipeline for this question, is it going to be more efficient (on the app) to write 1 pipeline that triggers on the Record Created and then use If/then statements to create up to 5 result records? Or would it be more efficient to have 5 pipelines that each trigger slightly differently (based on the conditionals that would otherwise be used in only a single pipeline)? I'm assuming that with the answer provided I can extrapolate to pipelines to deal with Record Updated triggers? Record Deleted trigger is just a single pipeline because it is just delete all associated records without any conditionals or any additional loops apart from the initial search, so that won't change any. I can tell you from the building a pipeline standpoint, making 5 pipelines seems more efficient, simpler, and therefore more accurate than making 1 long pipeline to handle all 5 cases. And it seems like I could handle much of the duplication necessary with duplication of entire pipeline from the pipelines dashboard or with export/import of YAML files if need be. Thanks for the input, Dave ------------------------------ David Halter ------------------------------ Re: Help with a formula query, pleaseBack to the OP question (my own) after discussion with support, this is a known issue when apps are in DD-MM-YYYY format. Might be something to consider if you ever need to change the format in your app. The issue ID is QBE016513. The proposed solution/workaround was to convert any date I want to compare into a number in its own field and then run my query based on that number field using GT, GTE, LT, LTE, EX, XEX and etc. The proposed date to number conversion here: ToNumber(ToText(Year([User Input Date]))& PadLeft(ToText(Month([User Input Date])),2,"0")& PadLeft(ToText(Day([User Input Date])),2,"0")) Though to me,this sort of conversion makes more sense, since it always puts two consecutivedates as two consecutive numbers: ToDays([User Input Date]-Date(1970, 1, 1)) Bit of a pain, really, to have to have both a Date fieldand a Number field for each date that I might want to compare later, but since it is really important for my potential users to have DD-MM-YYYY formats, it will be worth it. At least I'm not also dealing with hh:mm:ss! Is there a way we close these discussions? Or do they just remain forever open to be commented on whenever? ------------------------------ David Halter ------------------------------ Re: Help with a formula query, pleaseWell, after a lot more testing, I think I figured out part of the problem above. The text version of today's date, despite my app and profile set to use DDMMYYYY works as the rest of the equations do when I write it out in MMDDYYYY format. I still don't think the queries are working as expected, however, and in fact are giving very unexpected results. To that end, I opened a case with support. So far they agreed that their results are not the same as mine and they are going to check out my app. Thanks for considering. ------------------------------ David Halter ------------------------------ Help with a formula query, pleaseI'm having trouble with a formula query. I can't get the output to match what I expect. Right now, all I want is the field to give a list of all my records that have a User Input Date on or before the User Input Date in that record. I hope to use method eventually to identify duplicate records, but right now even this simple query is not working right. Something is messed up. Can you help me find it? I have [User Input Date] with field ID 18 [Record ID#] (the output currently) has field ID 3 I created a Date Formula field called [TodaysTheDay] where the equation is Today() I created a Text Formula field called [TempDateCompare] where the formula is: If([User Input Date]<Today(),"User Input Date IS before today","") Today is May 4th and my app and environment is set to use DD-MM-YYYY The problem query field is now called problemQueryDate and is set as a Formula-Text field. The formula is: var text queryOne = "{'18'.BF.'04-05-2022'}"; var text queryTwo = "{'18'.BF.'"&Today()&"'}"; var text queryThree = "{'18'.BF.'"&[User Input Date]&"'}"; var text queryFour = "{'18'.BF.'"&[TodaysTheDay]&"'}"; "One: " & ToText(GetFieldValues(GetRecords($queryOne),3)) & "\n Two: " & ToText(GetFieldValues(GetRecords($queryTwo),3)) & "\n Three: " & ToText(GetFieldValues(GetRecords($queryThree),3)) & "\n Four: " & ToText(GetFieldValues(GetRecords($queryFour),3)) The results I'm getting are in this screenshot: queryOne, queryTwo, and queryFour should be exactly the same, but only queryOne, where I specify the date, is working. queryThree should be blank for record 4, "4" for record 3, and "3 ; 4" for record 1 Yes, I only have 3 records total in this table, but even so this isn't working. What am I missing? ------------------------------ David Halter ------------------------------ Autofilling fields when adding a Child Record after generating a Temporary ReportHi, I'm back at this Quickbase still in the hopes of convincing my organization we should go with this. Now I have a minor annoyance that seems like it should really be fixable but I'm not sure. I really want my users to view the Location table and from the appropriate record, click View Clients, then search for a Client, and if not present, add that Client (duplicates may cause many problems!). When the user clicks "View Clients..." this produces a temporary report, where the "Related Location is #" On that page, if the client doesn't exist, the user will click the "+New Client" This is where the minor annoyance comes in. In the new record form for adding the client, the user now has to specify the parent record from Location even though they just left a page where the location was specified. Is there a way to automatically fill that field based on the fact the user just left a page where the related parent record was already specified? Also, for many users, there is only going to be one choice for Location anyway, which makes it also a minor annoyance to not have the field automatically populate with the only choice available. Any methods to reduce this annoyance? Thanks Dave ------------------------------ David Halter ------------------------------