Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply

Layout issue.

New Member
Posts: 2
Country: United States

Layout issue.

I have created a new layout in ACT! I emailed the layout file to our remote users but one guy can't get it to work.  I have had him delete the file, resave and sync with me but it's still not working.  Any suggestions to make his system take the new layout?
Platinum Elite Contributor
Posts: 14,384
Country: Australia

Re: Layout issue.

Platinum Elite Contributor
Posts: 6,653
Country: USA

Re: Layout issue.

If you changed field definitions and then synced the field definitions, you now have different links between the database and the layout. Only fix, consolidate all the databases back to one database (don't use sync or you will corrupt your data) and then set up sync from scratch. Check these documents.

 

11647, 11979 and 11740 

Roy Laudenslager
ACT! Certified Consultant
ACT! Report Expert
Durkin Impact Report Designer
www.techbenders.com
royel@techbenders.com
541-343-8129
Platinum Elite Contributor
Posts: 14,384
Country: Australia

Re: Layout issue.


Roy_Laudenslage wrote:

If you changed field definitions and then synced the field definitions, you now have different links between the database and the layout.


 

Correct me if my memory isn't right... I think that should only happen if either:

a) Fields have been deleted at any time - rule never delete fields if planning to sync, just make them 1 char and remove from the Layout

b) The remote user isn't an Admin and therefore can't apply the schema changes

 

Otherwise, providing your sync setup is set to send/receive field changes, changing/adding fields and sending updated layout should be ok.

Platinum Elite Contributor
Posts: 6,653
Country: USA

Re: Layout issue.

No, it turns out that you should never sync field changes except to change the size, data type or name of a field that already exists. The issue of deleting fields is only part of the issue. If the master had deleted fields before creating the remotes, that can cause problems. Another goodie is that when adding fields via sync, if you are adding more than one field there is no guarantee that the field will be added in the same order. The bottom line ACT! 3 - 6 sync was very fragile and many of the options should never been included.
Roy Laudenslager
ACT! Certified Consultant
ACT! Report Expert
Durkin Impact Report Designer
www.techbenders.com
royel@techbenders.com
541-343-8129
Platinum Elite Contributor
Posts: 14,384
Country: Australia

Re: Layout issue.


Roy_Laudenslage wrote:
No, it turns out that you should never sync field changes except to change the size, data type or name of a field that already exists. The issue of deleting fields is only part of the issue. If the master had deleted fields before creating the remotes, that can cause problems.
Yup - ANY deleted field at any time. Only fix is to create a new database and copy the data
Another goodie is that when adding fields via sync, if you are adding more than one field there is no guarantee that the field will be added in the same order.
Ahhh... I must have been lucky. Don't think I ever hit that one
The bottom line ACT! 3 - 6 sync was very fragile and many of the options should never been included.

I never had a real issue with sync in 5/6 if the KB articles YOU wrote were followed to the letter.

 

3/4 was a very different matter - I was on the AAB at the time and recall the heated exchanges before we managed to convince Michaela with the help of David Grant and Ted Cooper. They flew me to Oregon to discuss it, which is when I had the privilege to meet your good self sit with you on some calls :-)