Boolean Parameter

Hi,

I have a Summary report and a Detail (drillthrough) report.

the summary report displays.

Summary report

Code Snippet

Adult | Male | Count

--

Yes | Yes | 50

Yes | No | 9

No | Yes | 20

No | No | 50

| 129

When the user clicks on the hightlighted count it links to the Details report displaying each of the records referenced.

The detail report uses 2 boolean parameters Adult & Male, this works perfectly for the first 4 lines displayed, however if the user clicks on the total value to display all the records, i'm unable to provide the NULL value.

Any ideas?

Hi,

This may be due to the way you pass parameters to the sub-report.

you may not get answers if you are not more specific.

How is the total item generated. Why use a NULL value instead of something like "ALL" or "%" when the user select the total.

This may be easier to catch in the sub or linked report, the sub report will easilly interpret LIKE '%' rather than some NULL value.

Please provide some more details.

Philippe

|||

Hi,

The report queries against a database field that is a boolean but can accept a NULL value.

So i configured the recieving report to accept a boolean value "True, False & also Null".

If i used LIKE as the where criteria it obviously wouldn't be as efficent.

Regards

Ian

|||

What about using a dropdown param (whether multi select or not, depending on your needs) rather than a boolean here? Provide a tinyint to your procedure, if you're using a procedure to receive the parameter values, in which one value (say, 2) represents null. Interpret the results of what you get as this parameter to build up your query -- you could interpret it as an IN() rather than as a LIKE, or as ORs if you prefer (although the ORs are probably going to be interpreted internally just like the IN).

One really good way to do this is to use ISNULL(TheField,2) in your WHERE condition...

The point is, the default parameter representation for booleans with those radio buttons (with or without null checkbox) is hokey to start with, why not just use a dropdown with labels you like to represent them and integer values underneath.

>L<

|||

Hi Lisa,

Thank you for your input, that sounds like the way that i should have done it. i'll check out the dropdown options.

i would like a rant about the SRS report and boolean parameter at this stage....however i don't have the time or anyone else the want to read it. lol

cheers everyone.

ian

|||>> would like a rant about the SRS report and boolean parameter

I have done this before and generally don't care whether anybody wants to read it when I'm in the mood to rant on this sort of topic -- although I blog the rant rather than posting to a forum in that case <g>.

In this case, I honestly think the rant would be misdirected. As I have said several times in posts on this forum (because it is NOT a rant <s>), the default parameter representation is just that: a default. You can hide this panel, present your own parameter interface, and pass params to the report. I think this is always what was intended. The default just had to be generic enough to work without any sort of business logic connection and was never expected to be "the interface that you presented in your polished application".

>L<

Boolean Parameter

Hi,

I have a Summary report and a Detail (drillthrough) report.

the summary report displays.

Summary report

Code Snippet

Adult | Male | Count

--

Yes | Yes | 50

Yes | No | 9

No | Yes | 20

No | No | 50

| 129

When the user clicks on the hightlighted count it links to the Details report displaying each of the records referenced.

The detail report uses 2 boolean parameters Adult & Male, this works perfectly for the first 4 lines displayed, however if the user clicks on the total value to display all the records, i'm unable to provide the NULL value.

Any ideas?

Hi,

This may be due to the way you pass parameters to the sub-report.

you may not get answers if you are not more specific.

How is the total item generated. Why use a NULL value instead of something like "ALL" or "%" when the user select the total.

This may be easier to catch in the sub or linked report, the sub report will easilly interpret LIKE '%' rather than some NULL value.

Please provide some more details.

Philippe

|||

Hi,

The report queries against a database field that is a boolean but can accept a NULL value.

So i configured the recieving report to accept a boolean value "True, False & also Null".

If i used LIKE as the where criteria it obviously wouldn't be as efficent.

Regards

Ian

|||

What about using a dropdown param (whether multi select or not, depending on your needs) rather than a boolean here? Provide a tinyint to your procedure, if you're using a procedure to receive the parameter values, in which one value (say, 2) represents null. Interpret the results of what you get as this parameter to build up your query -- you could interpret it as an IN() rather than as a LIKE, or as ORs if you prefer (although the ORs are probably going to be interpreted internally just like the IN).

One really good way to do this is to use ISNULL(TheField,2) in your WHERE condition...

The point is, the default parameter representation for booleans with those radio buttons (with or without null checkbox) is hokey to start with, why not just use a dropdown with labels you like to represent them and integer values underneath.

>L<

|||

Hi Lisa,

Thank you for your input, that sounds like the way that i should have done it. i'll check out the dropdown options.

i would like a rant about the SRS report and boolean parameter at this stage....however i don't have the time or anyone else the want to read it. lol

cheers everyone.

ian

|||>> would like a rant about the SRS report and boolean parameter

I have done this before and generally don't care whether anybody wants to read it when I'm in the mood to rant on this sort of topic -- although I blog the rant rather than posting to a forum in that case <g>.

In this case, I honestly think the rant would be misdirected. As I have said several times in posts on this forum (because it is NOT a rant <s>), the default parameter representation is just that: a default. You can hide this panel, present your own parameter interface, and pass params to the report. I think this is always what was intended. The default just had to be generic enough to work without any sort of business logic connection and was never expected to be "the interface that you presented in your polished application".

>L<

Boolean Parameter

Hi,

I have a Summary report and a Detail (drillthrough) report.

the summary report displays.

Summary report

Code Snippet

Adult | Male | Count

--

Yes | Yes | 50

Yes | No | 9

No | Yes | 20

No | No | 50

| 129

When the user clicks on the hightlighted count it links to the Details report displaying each of the records referenced.

The detail report uses 2 boolean parameters Adult & Male, this works perfectly for the first 4 lines displayed, however if the user clicks on the total value to display all the records, i'm unable to provide the NULL value.

Any ideas?

Hi,

This may be due to the way you pass parameters to the sub-report.

you may not get answers if you are not more specific.

How is the total item generated. Why use a NULL value instead of something like "ALL" or "%" when the user select the total.

This may be easier to catch in the sub or linked report, the sub report will easilly interpret LIKE '%' rather than some NULL value.

Please provide some more details.

Philippe

|||

Hi,

The report queries against a database field that is a boolean but can accept a NULL value.

So i configured the recieving report to accept a boolean value "True, False & also Null".

If i used LIKE as the where criteria it obviously wouldn't be as efficent.

Regards

Ian

|||

What about using a dropdown param (whether multi select or not, depending on your needs) rather than a boolean here? Provide a tinyint to your procedure, if you're using a procedure to receive the parameter values, in which one value (say, 2) represents null. Interpret the results of what you get as this parameter to build up your query -- you could interpret it as an IN() rather than as a LIKE, or as ORs if you prefer (although the ORs are probably going to be interpreted internally just like the IN).

One really good way to do this is to use ISNULL(TheField,2) in your WHERE condition...

The point is, the default parameter representation for booleans with those radio buttons (with or without null checkbox) is hokey to start with, why not just use a dropdown with labels you like to represent them and integer values underneath.

>L<

|||

Hi Lisa,

Thank you for your input, that sounds like the way that i should have done it. i'll check out the dropdown options.

i would like a rant about the SRS report and boolean parameter at this stage....however i don't have the time or anyone else the want to read it. lol

cheers everyone.

ian

|||>> would like a rant about the SRS report and boolean parameter

I have done this before and generally don't care whether anybody wants to read it when I'm in the mood to rant on this sort of topic -- although I blog the rant rather than posting to a forum in that case <g>.

In this case, I honestly think the rant would be misdirected. As I have said several times in posts on this forum (because it is NOT a rant <s>), the default parameter representation is just that: a default. You can hide this panel, present your own parameter interface, and pass params to the report. I think this is always what was intended. The default just had to be generic enough to work without any sort of business logic connection and was never expected to be "the interface that you presented in your polished application".

>L<

Book Recommendation?

Can anyone recommend a good book or site on Full Text Searching which goes
into detail about things like full text ranked search across multiple tables
especially using phrases not single words? I find the whole thing counter
intuitive compared to normal SQL
Chris,
Not at this time... but look for http://www.SQLFTS.com to come online soon
with content as I own this URL and I'm currently developing the content. As
for a book, I just today re-submitted a new book proposal to a publisher's
Editor-in-Chief (at her request) as the overall technical book market has
been in decline and new books have been difficult to launch on this subject.
However, with the Google IPO and with various announcements from Microsoft,
MSN and Steve Ballmer -
http://www.boston.com/business/techn...llenge_google/
- to quote this article - "Meanwhile, Ballmer left no doubt that Microsoft
has targeted Internet search services for the kind of all-out competitive
push that the company once used to seize dominance in Web browser software.
Despite Google's popularity, "the search market is still quite fragmented,"
Ballmer said, and existing tools still generate lots of useless results.
Ballmer said Microsoft plans to invent new search technology that will
change this, and make life more difficult for Google and other rivals."
So, now it seems to be a good time to be writing a book on Microsoft Search
Technology, including SQL Server 2005! Anyone should feel free to post &/or
email me (mailto:jt-kane@.comcast.net) with comments, encouragements,
feedback, suggestions etc. on both website content as well as future book
content!
Thanks,
John
Looking for a book &/or information on SQL FTS?
http://www.SQLFTS.com - First To Search for SQL Full-Text Search
"Chris Kennedy" <chrisknospam@.cybase.co.uk> wrote in message
news:O0WRakQkEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Can anyone recommend a good book or site on Full Text Searching which goes
> into detail about things like full text ranked search across multiple
tables
> especially using phrases not single words? I find the whole thing counter
> intuitive compared to normal SQL
>

Blank line in Group using RS2000

I have a table with 3 groups before the detail level. In the second
level I use a filter because one of the group only have information in
the top group. The problem is that when I make a deploy with the
hidden camp - true is show well but when I put false in the Hidden
it's shows a blank line before the other group. How can I solve this
problem?On Apr 2, 9:52 am, pedro.geral...@.netvisao.pt wrote:
> I have a table with 3 groups before the detail level. In the second
> level I use a filter because one of the group only have information in
> the top group. The problem is that when I make a deploy with the
> hidden camp - true is show well but when I put false in the Hidden
> it's shows a blank line before the other group. How can I solve this
> problem?
I'm assuming you already have checked 'Fit table on one page if
possible' as part of the Table control properties. Which may only
shrink the overall table a little bit. Otherwise, as far as I know,
there's not much else that you can do to eliminate the empty row. That
said, you should be able to control this better as part of your stored
procedure or query that is sourcing the report. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant