<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - EDITING: Query input in foreignkey-field impossible, when two tables in the query." href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68153#c10">Comment # 10</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - EDITING: Query input in foreignkey-field impossible, when two tables in the query." href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68153">bug 68153</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:lionel@mamane.lu" title="Lionel Elie Mamane <lionel@mamane.lu>"> Lionel Elie Mamane</a> <pre>(In reply to Howard Johnson from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=68153#c9">comment #9</a>) > I think development of this missing Base functionality needs to get bumped > up to a much higher priority. You seem to be under the impression that someone sets global priorities for Base (or LibreOffice more generally) development. There is not. The development that happens is the one that people do, according to their own decisions. In general, if you think something should happen, do it or have it done by someone (e.g. by hiring that someone). > What were talking about here is the ability to edit many-to-one relations in > queries, and in forms based on those queries. Not quite. I use several related data forms/subforms (within the same document window) to edit stuff based on JOIN. Don't perform the JOIN in the query itself, but through the "link master fields" and "link slave fields" of data forms & subforms. > This is a fundamental, relational, functionality, that is sorely missing in > Base. Base is not a database engine. If the database engine that you use (such as embedded HSQLDB 1.8, MySQL, PostgreSQL, ...) cannot do something, Base will not do it for you. > Not only does the user expect to be able to update all fields, including a > foreign key in a query, but a user NEEDS to be able to update a foreign key > in a query. I'm curious what meaning you will ascribe to editing the foreign key. In the example of <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=68153#c0">comment 0</a>, if both town_ID and town are modified, what happens? E.g. the tables contents is: name: 5, Johns, 3 town: 3, Fil 7, Lon So the query result is: 5, Johns, 3, 3, Fil Now, the user changes town_ID to 7 and town to 'Ess'. What do you expect the tables to contain? name: 5, Johns, 7 town: 3, Fil 7, Ess or name: 5, Johns, 7 town: 3, Ess 7, Lon ??? > Editable queries that can only operate on single unrelated tables is > ancient, not just in my opinion, but in actual fact: Access has had this > important many-to-one query functionality working for 20 years that I know > of. No, it doesn't. In a query, the join fields are not editable. I think you and I understand <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=68153#c0">comment 0</a> differently. Very exactly, Access will not let you update neither "town_ID" nor "t_ID" in the query of <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=68153#c0">comment 0</a>. > * I also re-confirmed that Access 2003 provides this functionality correctly > on the exact same MariaDB. See above. > * Because this functionality exists in Access when ODBC/MySQL linked > (connected) to MariaDB, See above. > Note: Forms can use a subform to edit related one-to-many tables (has), > but this is not equivalent to many-to-one (is) functionality. How is it not? I use it both with one-to-one and in one-to-many relationships.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>