I have GridPlus implemented nicely and does the basic editing and saving as it should, what a great plug in!
But... we have a requirement added to create a related record which would link the edited items to a known key value in a related table.
Since both the queryRule and gridsubmitchanges->editModel are kind of rigidly defined, I've been thinking of ways to accomplish adding the record to join the edited rows with the other table.
Can a related action apply to just the 'edits' / is there a way to pass that?
I explored the possibility of a 'tempKey' in the queryRule's queryRecordType, but can't really insert that known key value there. If I could just get the data into the record, then the editModel could do the additional writerecords & sync.
Is there some simple way to accomplish this without having to get heavy handed by maybe writing to another data store to be re-read in the editModel? (so it would know "any records updated from this grid with these record keys must associate the stored key that I just re-read"?
Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible
Use GridPlus's edited records payload (via editModel), pass your known key as a process parameter, and in the same process do two Write Records calls (one for grid edits, one for join rows). No temp datastore needed.
Thanks Shubham!
Can I pass items to the editModel? It seems to only allow constant reference to proc model with no visible way to pass params:
You can’t pass custom params to editModel , so stamp the known key onto each edited row before submit.
Add your known key as a field on each edited row before submit. The process then reads pv!record and runs both Write Records; one for the edited rows, one for the join rows.
Thanks!
I do have that tempKey added as a field on the edited recordtype, just the stamping part into the record is problematic for me because the queryRule seems to choke if I deviate even slightly from a straight up a!queryRecordType. (why I was saying it is all rigidly implemented ).
These are all good thoughts, and it seems like it's close. Say, were you at Appian World this year?
Wait a moment, I think I was updating the a!queryRecordType results incorrectly. Mea Culpa, this might work. Thanks again Shubham
Well... the queryrule cannot use local vars, so update stamping is out... "This rule must explicitly define all values without relying on local variables." I guess the write / read at update proc model time is the way to go.
No, couldn't make Appian World this year, hoping to next time! And agreed, since the queryRule won't take locals, handling the key inside the editModel process is the way to go.