4 Replies Latest reply: May 15, 2014 10:07 AM by Edie _ RSS

    Need A Little Help

    Edie _

      stumbled upon this forum while looking for help on the datawatch site.  i've had 1 class in monarch after the reading the V7 manual and figuring things out on my own.  i've tried everything i can think of regarding the following but just can't seem to get it right. 

       

      making a change to a existing model that i created.  out of the 14 columns i have set up there are 4 which are numeric.  i'm trying to create a filter that will hide the row whenever all 4 of the numeric columns are '0.'

       

      seems to me that - column name >0 .and. column name >0 and so on would do it but that gives me nothing.

       

      i'd feel better if it were something really really difficult but i have a feeling that it's something really really simple. :o

       

      thanks for any input - edie

        • Need A Little Help
          Data Kruncher

          Hello Edie and welcome to the forum!

           

          One way to display the records that you want might be to just add all four of the columns/fields up and then check that the total doesn't equal zero:

           

          (Field1Field2Field3+Field4)<>0[/code]But that might not be appropriate as, say,  Field1 could be 10 and Field2 could be -10, and Fields 3 and 4 were zero. This record would be returned by that filter formula.

           

          The only way to guarantee that you Monarch will not display records for which each of the four fields have zero values is to list each one, as in:

          (Field1 <> 0) .And.

          (Field2 <> 0) .And.

          (Field3 <> 0) .And.

          (Field4 <> 0)

          /codeHTH,

          Kruncher

            • Need A Little Help
              Grant Perkins

              Hi Edie,

               

              Further to Kruncher's reply, if you have an opportunity to upgrade, from Monarch Version 8 the concept of Compound Filters has been available. It can make filtering work easier in a coupld of ways, the most evident way being that you can create (and test) single fields filters on a field by field basis and then let Monarch deal with creating the more complex filter for several fields using the single field filters that already know work for you.

               

              It makes life easier and also allows you to make any changes required in one place (one simple filter definition for example) and have them applied through all the compound filters automatically.

               

              HTH.

               

               

              Grant

              • Need A Little Help
                Edie _

                Hello Edie and welcome to the forum!

                 

                One way to display the records that you want might be to just add all four of the columns/fields up and then check that the total doesn't equal zero:

                 

                (Field1Field2Field3+Field4)<>0[/code]But that might not be appropriate as, say,  Field1 could be 10 and Field2 could be -10, and Fields 3 and 4 were zero. This record would be returned by that filter formula.

                 

                The only way to guarantee that you Monarch will not display records for which each of the four fields have zero values is to list each one, as in:

                (Field1 <> 0) .And.

                (Field2 <> 0) .And.

                (Field3 <> 0) .And.

                (Field4 <> 0)

                /codeHTH,

                Kruncher[/QUOTE]

                 

                tried your second example first - couldn't get it to work.  ended up clearing out everything.  i used the blahblahblah+blah (no 0's in any of the columns) and that did the trick.

                 

                thanks for your help.  i attend a conference every year regarding our computer system and i think i'm just about the only one using monarch.  everyone else uses CRYSTAL REPORTS.  i looked at that a bit and i think i might need a programming degree to use it!!

                 

                i'm sure i'll be bothering you again with questions.  thanks once again for your help.