Does any one know If there are any best-practices for editing/adding data in UI table while its data is filtered?
Example 1:
Suppose we have a table with two options: add new record and edit selected one. Moreover, the table has an option to filter data over column A.
Now, if the table is filtered by filtering column A with value '1' and I want to add a new record with value in column A that matches filter requirements, what should happen:
The table should refresh and display filtered records with selected newly added record.
The table should reset filter and show all records witch new one selected.
The table should do nothing and display filtered records as they were. Newly added record will be displayed when the filter resets.
For me intuitively the best solution is number 1. But then how to solve the problem in example number 2:
Example 2:
If the table is filtered by filtering column A with value '1' and I want to add a new record that in column A has value '2' what should happen:
The table should display filtered records with selected newly added record despite it does not matche the filter.
The table should reset the filter, and all records should be displayed with new one selected.
The table should do nothing and display filtered records as they were.
The same story is when we have filtered records, and in selected record we want to edit value upon which the filtering took place. Does the edited record should than disapear or filtre should be reset?
Or maybe the best way is to disable add/edit operations while filter is on?
I don't know if there is any best practices about it but I have also encountered the problem before. Two different solutions as I came up with:
Edited/Inserted record should not be filtered until the next time a filter is applied or filter is reset. The record should also be shown different (i.e. darker background color, or an icon, or tooltip) than others implying it was edited and is not being filtered.
The record should be left in focus after being edited or inserted. As soon as it loses focus, filter should be applied to it. The ideal solution is if the record is filtered out, it shouldn't immediately go out of vision. For instance it may go invisible with an animation.
I just checked the google docs and libre office, both of them just display the new record regardless of the filter. You need to re-apply the filter to hide them from view (in both cases the column "A" is filtered by "value 1"):
Related
I have a Dashboard with different visuals.
Data is made up of different values for insurance companies.
I want my slicers/filters to not filter all data, but to only highlight the chosen company.
For example, in my slicer I choose the insurance ABN.
Instead of showing me the value for ABN only in my visuals, I want all other values to still be visible and ABN's value to be highlighted in the visuals.
Does anyone know how to do this?
You can use conditional formatting to achieve this. Lets say that we will change the background color to "highlight" a row (or cells, to be precise).
First, we need a slicer, which will not filter our data. We can do this by duplicating our source table, removing the unnecessary columns and making sure there is no relationship between the source and the duplicate. So if we have a source table, named Table, like this:
Right click on it and select Duplicate:
Then right click the title of the column you want to keep and select Remove Other Columns to get a list of company names only (you may also remove the duplicates, but it's not required). Then in the model delete the relation between both tables:
Now you can place a table showing company name and sales from your data source, and a slicer for company name from the duplicate table. At this point selecting values in the slicer should not affect the table.
Now you need to capture the value of the slicer and use it in a measure, which will determine should current row be highlighted or not. You can use SELECTEDVALUE for that, but note that it will give you a value only if there is a one selected in the slicer. If you want to support highlighting of more than one company, it gets a bit more complicated.
Make a new measure in your source table, like this:
Measure = IF(HASONEVALUE('Table (2)'[Company name]);
IF(SELECTEDVALUE('Table (2)'[Company name]) = MAX('Table'[Company name]); 1; 0);
IF(ISFILTERED('Table (2)'[Company name]) && COUNTROWS(FILTER('Table (2)'; 'Table (2)'[Company name] = MAX('Table'[Company name]))); 1; 0))
In case there is only one value selected in the slicer (see HASONEVALUE), then our measure will return 1 (highlight) or 0 (don't), comparing it with the current row.
Otherwise (i.e. there is no selection in the slicer, or there are 2 or more companies selected), then we will look at the filtered list of companies (Table (2)) - if it contains current row, then 1 (highlight), otherwise 0 (don't). But we will also handle the case, where there is no value selected in the slicer. In this case the list will contain all the companies, i.e. all rows will be highlighted. Here comes ISFILTERED. And at the end, if the list is filtered and current row exists in the filtered list, then 1 (highlight), otherwise 0 (don't).
Now, you need to use this measure to change the background of the column - right click each column in your table and select Conditional formatting -> Background color:
Then format by rules, where Measure >= 1 like this:
Now, when there is no selection in the slicer, there are no rows highlighted in the table:
If you select one company, it is highlighted:
It also work if there are multiple companies selected:
Thank you Andrey for your step-by-step explanation which as been incredible helpful. I'd like to follow up with a further question, particularly regarding the comment below.
"You can use SELECTEDVALUE for that, but note that it will give you a
value only if there is a one selected in the slicer. If you want to
support highlighting of more than one company, it gets a bit more
complicated."
In my model, I've linked a third table (Table (3)) to Table (2) with a many to one relationship with Table (2). Therefore when I click on Table (3), it will filter Table (2), which acts as a slicer for Table (1).
When only 1 value is filtered in Table (2), it conditionally formats the cells in Table (1). However, when more than 1 value is filtered in Table (2), conditional formatting fails.
As I'm looking to avoid manually selecting multiple values in the slicer (Table (2)), I was wondering if there's a workaround for SELECTEDVALUE such that it is able to conditionally format when I filter more than 1 value in Table (2).
Populating an Apex 5.1 select list of employees with about 25,000 names is proving to be a performance problem when loading the page. Is there a method of limiting the initial list to a set number (such as 200), and dynamically populating with chunks of additional names as the user scrolls through the list? Are there other options I should consider that would not slow down the page load?
I am currently using a dynamic LOV, and have tried adjusting this LOV to include Oracle row limiting code; however, there is no way of fetching past the initial set of rows. The source of the data is a view on a materialized view.
I appreciate any ideas
I'd use a pop-up LOV with a search function, not showing any records until the user enters a search value (more than 3 characters). I know it's tedious to use a pop-up LOV but it seems the only way to prevent waiting for a slow list to display.
I'd try with cascading lists of values. I don't know what those 25.000 names represent, but - suppose it is a large company. Then you'd
1st LoV: continent
2nd Lov: country
which refers to the previous LoV as where country.continent = :P1_CONTINENT
3rd LoV: city
which refers the previous LoV as where city.coutry = :P1_COUNTRY
4rd Lov is actually your current query:
which refers to the previous Lov as where person.city = :P1_CITY
Now your list of values wouldn't contain 25.000 rows, but - hopefully - a lot less.
Good afternoon!
I have created a report with the wizard to create a matrix that is grouped and has drill down rows. I have added filters to the rows and columns and it works great! I then copied that matrix and modified the filters, so I had two matrixes.
But what I really wanted was those two rows in the same matrix, just in different row groups. So I added another group, using the adjacent below option, and then added all the child groupings. However, when I run the report it shows the values for the first row of the drill down data.
When I look at the groupings I can see the one I did manually has a 'Static' field in each row grouping but the ones that the wizard did (with the red ?), they don't have that "extra" row:
What do I need to change or how do I need to add my groups so that I don't get that "static" row and not show the data? I have the visibility set to 'Hidden' and the toggle set up for the prior grouping set data.
Assuming a few things....
the data comes from a single dataset
You are differentiating between Property and Violent crimes by filtering on a column, I'll call it IncidentGroup for the sake of illustration..
I've understood your question ! :)
Get to the point where you had just a single tablix filtered to show 'Property crime'.
Now remove or edit that filter so it shows all the data you need in the report.
Finally, right click on your Matrix1_IncidentCategory row and add a parent group, choose IncidentGroup (or whatever the column is actually called) and check the box to add a group header.
That should be it, there is no need for a second tablix.
Without knowing how you are filtering currently it's hard to give a complete answer but this should get you close, if not all the way there.
If this doesn't work for whatever reason, please post sample data from your dataset output and your current filters.
Is there an easy way of retrieving the ALV data that is displayed when there are also filters used on that ALV?
The ALV used is an object of CL_GUI_ALV_GRID. When showing it to the user, there is a filter placed on it by default. The user also has a button that processes the data in the ALV. How can I make sure the process only works with the data that is displayed, even if the user places his own filters on the ALV?
e.g: An ALV gets created from an itab that has 10 rows, but because there is also a filter passed on the ALV, only 8 rows are showing. When pressing a button, I only want to work with the 8 rows currently showing to the user.
I have tried finding a function module for this purpose but I can only find a FM which works with the selected rows in an ALV.
EDIT: Further, there is a method called get_filtered_entries, but it only retrieves those entries that are NOT displayed. Using this will be quite time-consuming to make the translation to displayed entries. get_filtered_entries
Thanks in advance.
GET_FILTERED_ENTRIES returns a table of excluded row indices. You just have to skip those in your processing.
" Copy original table
DATA(lit_buffer) = it_out[].
" Get excluded rows
o_grid->get_filtered_entries(
IMPORTING
et_filtered_entries = DATA(lit_index)
).
" Reverse order to keep correct indizes; thnx futu
SORT lit_index DESCENDING.
" Remove excluded rows from buffer
LOOP AT lit_index ASSIGNING FIELD-SYMBOL(<index>).
DELETE lit_buffer INDEX <index>.
ENDLOOP.
EDIT: I debugged cl_gui_alv_grid a little and it doesn't seems like that a filtered version of the original table exists at all. The lines get filtered, sorted, grouped and immediately transferred into a table of cells. Looks like it is nearly impossible to get the displayed rows without a performance drawback.
Is it possible to dynamically hide rows in a table view without reloading everything? I have a (view based) table view with it's content member bound to an array controller (arrangedObjects) which itself gets its content from Core Data.
To enrich the UI I show group rows for sections with the same date (all entries in this set have a date in this case). But for certain tasks I need to hide these group rows (e.g. when sorting for something else but the date). In order to show them I already have to create a copy of the original data set and manually insert entries that serve as placeholders for the group rows (which is annyoing as it duplicates data), but I don't want to re-construct this constantly depending on whether the group rows must be shown or not. Is there a better way for this?
Hiding any row requires to rearrange the table view content anyway.
Create all rows including group rows and filter the group rows if needed by applying an appropriate filter predicate.