Home General
New Blog Posts: Merging Reports - Part 1 and Part 2

One report with two DataPipelines

edited November 2001 in General
Hello,
I need two datapipelines work with one report (Because I have too
many datafields in one table for Paradox), How can I handle this?

Redars,
Meixi

Comments

  • edited November 2001
    The easiest solution would be to create a query and perform a sql join on
    mutiple tables. Are you creating the tables right now or are they already
    populated? Would it at all be possible to create the table definitions so
    that you have a more relational data structure? Break it up into as many
    data tables as you logically can, and the reports will be much easier to
    build down the road as more and more reports are based off of this data.

    If you do have two datasources, you could change it around so that you could
    hook a single JITPipeline up to the report. The JITPipeline would read the
    data from one of two datasources in its OnGetFieldValue event.

    Cheers,

    Jim Bennett
    Digital Metaphors


  • edited November 2001
    Hello, Jim:
    Thanks for reply!
    Actually my report have several pages, each page has a form( Image
    background). I follow the tutorial "Hooking Reports Together with Section-Style
    Subreports" to make this report.
    There is one form has too many fileds on it. So they create two tables (I
    don't need create tables) for this form(one page). Before, when there is one
    table for one form, I just need set Table component, DataSource component,
    BDEPipeline component and Report component. But now I need two Table components,
    two Datasource components, two BDEPipeline components and one Report component.
    Is that possible for just setting the Report component properties to solve this
    problem?
    (This Report already populated, but it was not processed by computer)

    Regards,
    Meixi


  • edited November 2001
    OK! Use Master -> Detail report can solve this problem.

  • edited November 2001
    Yes, you could get away with master-detail link if both tables have the same
    primary key values, so that there will only be one detail record for every
    master.


    Cheers,

    Jim Bennett
    Digital Metaphors


This discussion has been closed.