OK a bit of a strange title but I kind of want to have a discussion about it.SO here comes what happened[quote]Last week my boss demanded I drop everything I was working on and make some changes to an existing report (a report I never seen cause it's not from our department)The report shows for the past month,each day the orders that have arrived,it also shows how many workdays an order took to arrive.Besides a begin and end date,which are on default current date minus a month and current date minus a day,there are 8 other parameters, ranging from ordernumber to country where the order arrived. All these parameters start with a default value of "_ALL" which basically means they can be ignored in the outcome.My boss wanted to make it cascading so that when you select 1 value for 1 of the parameters you can only choose for valid options in the others.[i]So for instance choose the UK as country you should only be able to choose out of orders in the UK.[/i]So I looked into the queries that filled in the parameters and saw that their actually all looking towards the same table,so I made a stored procedure to get the cascades dynamically.I implemented this into the report,knowing full well that upwards cascading is not possible.I tested the report,send both the files as a mail explaining it to him.Yesterday he comes to me,angry that the cascade does not work,I explain him that upwards cascading is not possible. He insist I did not do my work properly,so compromise I spend an hour after work looking into it further.Off course after that hour I was able to proof to him it was not possible like he wanted. [/quote]Now the discussion I wanted to start is 'Why is it not possible',is their any valid reason you would not be able to do an upwards cascade.
↧