Subject | Re: [IBO] Refresh Action |
---|---|
Author | Paul Vinkenoog |
Post date | 2004-02-14T03:15:15Z |
Hi James,
you change the ordering for instance, and the set is (auto)refreshed,
you'll notice the difference:
- With raKeepRowNum the same _row_ (e.g. the third) stays current,
even if it now shows a totally different _record_.
- With raKeepDataPos it's the other way round: if possible the
same _record_ stays current, even if it has moved to an entirely
different _row_.
If you have OrderingItems and OrderingLinks set up, you can easily
see this if you change the sorting column or invert the ordering.
Greetings,
Paul Vinkenoog
> Sorry, but I can't tell the difference between the raKeepRowNum andIf both data and SQL haven't changed, they work out the same. But if
> raKeepDataPos?
> Can somebody explain this to me? It looks like they are the same
> to me.
you change the ordering for instance, and the set is (auto)refreshed,
you'll notice the difference:
- With raKeepRowNum the same _row_ (e.g. the third) stays current,
even if it now shows a totally different _record_.
- With raKeepDataPos it's the other way round: if possible the
same _record_ stays current, even if it has moved to an entirely
different _row_.
If you have OrderingItems and OrderingLinks set up, you can easily
see this if you change the sorting column or invert the ordering.
Greetings,
Paul Vinkenoog