<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ASCII"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vanishing data in Btrieve</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/638/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/638</link>
	<description>Independent news, tips and thoughts from a Crystal Reports expert</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 12:33:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Hamady</title>
		<link>http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/638/comment-page-1#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Hamady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 21:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kenhamady.com/cru/?p=638#comment-76</guid>
		<description>Yes, Btrieve is not alone in this. I have run into this before in several environments where I had to &#039;break&#039; the SQL to get things to work correctly.  It is probably the same index issue.  In some cases, especially when it is a filter field, putting the field in a formula isn&#039;t enough to keep it out of the SQL, which is why I have to resort to adding a function.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, Btrieve is not alone in this. I have run into this before in several environments where I had to &#8216;break&#8217; the SQL to get things to work correctly.  It is probably the same index issue.  In some cases, especially when it is a filter field, putting the field in a formula isn&#8217;t enough to keep it out of the SQL, which is why I have to resort to adding a function.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Hamady</title>
		<link>http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/638/comment-page-1#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Hamady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 21:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kenhamady.com/cru/?p=638#comment-75</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;From Gordon Portanier of Crystalize:&lt;/strong&gt;

Coincidental to your posting yesterday I had the exact same situation that you mentioned with regard to Betrieve. The inexplicable returning of zero records. It wasn&#8217;t with a Betrieve back end but with another application. This time the backend was something called ProvideX. I&#8217;m using the ProvideX ODBC driver. I&#8217;ve had problems with it because it doesn&#8217;t support the UNION join which is annoying but today&#8217;s behavior is undocumented as far as I know. It took me a while to figure out what the issue was. So the statement:
 
SELECT TA.Field, TB.Field, TC.Field
FROM TA, TB, TC
WHERE (TA.F1=TB.F1) and (TA.F2 = TC.F2)

Returns a nice set of records. But adding a group on a field from TC causes an order by clause to drop in there and then we get the following:

SELECT TA.Field, TB.Field, TC.Field
FROM TA, TB, TC
WHERE (TA.F1=TB.F1) and (TA.F2 = TC.F2)
ORDER BY TC.Field

This returns a fat zero records. As soon as I saw this I knew exactly how to fix it because I had just read your posting. Using a formula instead of the field. I just put the field in the formula (I didn&#8217;t need to use Totext) so that Crystal Reports doesn&#8217;t pass the ORDER BY Clause into the SQL which is causing the issue. I then grouped on that and I was fine. Problem solved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>From Gordon Portanier of Crystalize:</strong></p>
<p>Coincidental to your posting yesterday I had the exact same situation that you mentioned with regard to Betrieve. The inexplicable returning of zero records. It wasn&#8217;t with a Betrieve back end but with another application. This time the backend was something called ProvideX. I&#8217;m using the ProvideX ODBC driver. I&#8217;ve had problems with it because it doesn&#8217;t support the UNION join which is annoying but today&#8217;s behavior is undocumented as far as I know. It took me a while to figure out what the issue was. So the statement:</p>
<p>SELECT TA.Field, TB.Field, TC.Field<br />
FROM TA, TB, TC<br />
WHERE (TA.F1=TB.F1) and (TA.F2 = TC.F2)</p>
<p>Returns a nice set of records. But adding a group on a field from TC causes an order by clause to drop in there and then we get the following:</p>
<p>SELECT TA.Field, TB.Field, TC.Field<br />
FROM TA, TB, TC<br />
WHERE (TA.F1=TB.F1) and (TA.F2 = TC.F2)<br />
ORDER BY TC.Field</p>
<p>This returns a fat zero records. As soon as I saw this I knew exactly how to fix it because I had just read your posting. Using a formula instead of the field. I just put the field in the formula (I didn&#8217;t need to use Totext) so that Crystal Reports doesn&#8217;t pass the ORDER BY Clause into the SQL which is causing the issue. I then grouped on that and I was fine. Problem solved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.370 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-05-21 18:47:42 -->

