Suspect actions in a macro..
When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it returned: 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) 2) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 3) ** Unknown command ** Form-open: 4) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 5) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 6) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 7) ** Unknown command ** Form-final: modify☺@ I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would perform that same query twice? I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the query the second time? Joe ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Thanks Fred, That’s what I suspected. I didn’t have too many ‘good macros’ to compare as I saw a number of them that had this same ‘problem’. I’m suspecting that the client tool is actually running that search twice. I haven’t done tests to confirm that but if those instructions appear twice within the macro I don’t see how it would perform it only once. I may have some clean up to do. I have no idea why they have these statements twice – these were perhaps developed by end users and not the developer is my best guess. Since the macro recording process does not actually display the contents of what it has already recorded, it might have been easy for the end user to repeat some actions without suspecting the consequence. Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 6:05 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. I just looked at a couple here (I can’t believe I still had some macros on a network share) were in the format of Set Working Schema Perform Query Form-open Form-entry-list Form-final: modify So, Yes I believe lines 5 and line 6 are unnecessary and can be deleted. Fred From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 4:38 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. ** When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it returned: 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) 2) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 3) ** Unknown command ** Form-open: 4) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 5) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 6) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 7) ** Unknown command ** Form-final: modify☺@ I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would perform that same query twice? I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the query the second time? Joe _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Hi, I think it is the Form-Final that actually performs the search. Why not start client-side API-logging and see what happens? Why not record new macros in the user client? Macros still exists, right? Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se > > > Thanks Fred, > > > > That’s what I suspected. I didn’t have too many ‘good macros’ to > compare as I saw a number of them that had this same ‘problem’. I’m > suspecting that the client tool is actually running that search twice. I > haven’t done tests to confirm that but if those instructions appear twice > within the macro I don’t see how it would perform it only once. I may have > some clean up to do. > > > > I have no idea why they have these statements twice – these were perhaps > developed by end users and not the developer is my best guess. Since the macro > recording process does not actually display the contents of what it has > already recorded, it might have been easy for the end user to repeat some > actions without suspecting the consequence. > > > > Joe > > > > _ > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 6:05 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > > > I just looked at a couple here (I can’t believe I still had some macros on a > network share) were in the format of > > > > Set Working Schema > > Perform Query > > Form-open > > Form-entry-list > > Form-final: modify > > > > So, Yes I believe lines 5 and line 6 are unnecessary and can be deleted. > > > > Fred > > > > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 4:38 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > > > ** > > > > When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it > returned: > > > > 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) > > 2) Perform Query > > Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End > Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" > > 3) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-open: > > 4) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-entry-list: 0 > > 5) Perform Query > > Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End > Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" > > 6) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-entry-list: 0 > > 7) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-final: modify☺@ > > > > I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. > Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually > recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would > perform that same query twice? > > > > I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query > twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the > query the second time? > > > > Joe > > > > > > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Yes I need to do that, but there's another 'slight' problem that I need to address before doing that :-) The slight problem is, that the macros that have this particular problem, have underlying tables that are in excess of 200K records, one of them is actually having a record count of 6.5 million. And many of the columns used in the where part of the queries are not indexed, resulting in the operation chocking the server to near death. Which is why I ended up inspecting all those many macros to find out what I can from them. Obviously now is not the time to run those macros to fire the searches. I am in the process of collecting data to optimize these queries in the first place, so once that is done and implemented, I plan to tackle the problem of those queries appearing twice. Thanks for your suggestions anyways.. How's the little girl doing? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 3:24 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. Hi, I think it is the Form-Final that actually performs the search. Why not start client-side API-logging and see what happens? Why not record new macros in the user client? Macros still exists, right? Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se > > > Thanks Fred, > > > > That’s what I suspected. I didn’t have too many ‘good macros’ to > compare as I saw a number of them that had this same ‘problem’. I’m > suspecting that the client tool is actually running that search twice. I > haven’t done tests to confirm that but if those instructions appear twice > within the macro I don’t see how it would perform it only once. I may have > some clean up to do. > > > > I have no idea why they have these statements twice – these were perhaps > developed by end users and not the developer is my best guess. Since the macro > recording process does not actually display the contents of what it has > already recorded, it might have been easy for the end user to repeat some > actions without suspecting the consequence. > > > > Joe > > > > _ > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 6:05 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > > > I just looked at a couple here (I can’t believe I still had some macros on a > network share) were in the format of > > > > Set Working Schema > > Perform Query > > Form-open > > Form-entry-list > > Form-final: modify > > > > So, Yes I believe lines 5 and line 6 are unnecessary and can be deleted. > > > > Fred > > > > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 4:38 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > > > ** > > > > When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it > returned: > > > > 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) > > 2) Perform Query > > Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End > Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" > > 3) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-open: > > 4) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-entry-list: 0 > > 5) Perform Query > > Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End > Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" > > 6) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-entry-list: 0 > > 7) ** Unknown command ** > >Form-final: modify☺@ > > > > I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. > Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually > recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would > perform that same query twice? > > > > I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query > twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the > query the second time? > > > > Joe > > > > > > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Hi, Why not turn on your server logs for API/ESCL/SQL/FLTR and check which searches are actually performed and take time? That is the easiest way to figure out which indexes that is missing, or which queries needs to be rewritten. ADV: And why not use RRR|Log to do it? Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011) Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12): * RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing. * RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs. Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se. > Yes I need to do that, but there's another 'slight' problem that I need to > address before doing that :-) > > The slight problem is, that the macros that have this particular problem, have > underlying tables that are in excess of 200K records, one of them is actually > having a record count of 6.5 million. And many of the columns used in the > where part of the queries are not indexed, resulting in the operation chocking > the server to near death. Which is why I ended up inspecting all those many > macros to find out what I can from them. > > Obviously now is not the time to run those macros to fire the searches. I am > in the process of collecting data to optimize these queries in the first > place, so once that is done and implemented, I plan to tackle the problem of > those queries appearing twice. > > Thanks for your suggestions anyways.. > > How's the little girl doing? > > Joe > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 3:24 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > Hi, > > I think it is the Form-Final that actually performs the search. > > Why not start client-side API-logging and see what happens? > > Why not record new macros in the user client? Macros still exists, right? > > Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se > >> >> >> Thanks Fred, >> >> >> >> That’s what I suspected. I didn’t have too many ‘good macros’ to >> compare as I saw a number of them that had this same ‘problem’. I’m >> suspecting that the client tool is actually running that search twice. I >> haven’t done tests to confirm that but if those instructions appear twice >> within the macro I don’t see how it would perform it only once. I may have >> some clean up to do. >> >> >> >> I have no idea why they have these statements twice – these were perhaps >> developed by end users and not the developer is my best guess. Since the >> macro >> recording process does not actually display the contents of what it has >> already recorded, it might have been easy for the end user to repeat some >> actions without suspecting the consequence. >> >> >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> _ >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 6:05 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. >> >> >> >> I just looked at a couple here (I can’t believe I still had some macros on >> a >> network share) were in the format of >> >> >> >> Set Working Schema >> >> Perform Query >> >> Form-open >> >> Form-entry-list >> >> Form-final: modify >> >> >> >> So, Yes I believe lines 5 and line 6 are unnecessary and can be deleted. >> >> >> >> Fred >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 4:38 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. >> >> >> >> ** >> >> >> >> When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it >> returned: >> >> >> >> 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) >> >> 2) Perform Query >> >> Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End >> Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" >> >> 3) ** Unknown command ** >> >>Form-open: >> >> 4) ** Unknown command ** >> >>F
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Joe, Have you ever used armaced? It’s a command line based macro editor. You can use it to make recorded macros cleaner and easier to read. Tab _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 5:38 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it returned: 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) 2) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 3) ** Unknown command ** Form-open: 4) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 5) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 6) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 7) ** Unknown command ** Form-final: modify☺@ I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would perform that same query twice? I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the query the second time? Joe _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Yes, these logs would may also indicate that the modify is performed twice in rapid succession. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 4:03 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. Hi, Why not turn on your server logs for API/ESCL/SQL/FLTR and check which searches are actually performed and take time? That is the easiest way to figure out which indexes that is missing, or which queries needs to be rewritten. ADV: And why not use RRR|Log to do it? Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011) Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12): * RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing. * RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs. Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se. > Yes I need to do that, but there's another 'slight' problem that I need to > address before doing that :-) > > The slight problem is, that the macros that have this particular problem, have > underlying tables that are in excess of 200K records, one of them is actually > having a record count of 6.5 million. And many of the columns used in the > where part of the queries are not indexed, resulting in the operation chocking > the server to near death. Which is why I ended up inspecting all those many > macros to find out what I can from them. > > Obviously now is not the time to run those macros to fire the searches. I am > in the process of collecting data to optimize these queries in the first > place, so once that is done and implemented, I plan to tackle the problem of > those queries appearing twice. > > Thanks for your suggestions anyways.. > > How's the little girl doing? > > Joe > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 3:24 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > Hi, > > I think it is the Form-Final that actually performs the search. > > Why not start client-side API-logging and see what happens? > > Why not record new macros in the user client? Macros still exists, right? > > Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se > >> >> >> Thanks Fred, >> >> >> >> That’s what I suspected. I didn’t have too many ‘good macros’ to >> compare as I saw a number of them that had this same ‘problem’. I’m >> suspecting that the client tool is actually running that search twice. I >> haven’t done tests to confirm that but if those instructions appear twice >> within the macro I don’t see how it would perform it only once. I may have >> some clean up to do. >> >> >> >> I have no idea why they have these statements twice – these were perhaps >> developed by end users and not the developer is my best guess. Since the >> macro >> recording process does not actually display the contents of what it has >> already recorded, it might have been easy for the end user to repeat some >> actions without suspecting the consequence. >> >> >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> _ >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 6:05 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. >> >> >> >> I just looked at a couple here (I can’t believe I still had some macros on >> a >> network share) were in the format of >> >> >> >> Set Working Schema >> >> Perform Query >> >> Form-open >> >> Form-entry-list >> >> Form-final: modify >> >> >> >> So, Yes I believe lines 5 and line 6 are unnecessary and can be deleted. >> >> >> >> Fred >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 4:38 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. >> >> >> >> ** >> >> >> >> When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it >> returned: >> >> >> >> 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) >> >> 2) Perform Query >> >> Query bar -- '536871083' &
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
The output below is exactly from there. The macro itself if opened in notepad would not display its content in a fairly organized fashion as below. Its readable but not as readable as from the editor. Cheers Joe _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tab Forward Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 8:10 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. Joe, Have you ever used armaced? It’s a command line based macro editor. You can use it to make recorded macros cleaner and easier to read. Tab _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 5:38 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it returned: 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) 2) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 3) ** Unknown command ** Form-open: 4) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 5) Perform Query Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" 6) ** Unknown command ** Form-entry-list: 0 7) ** Unknown command ** Form-final: modify☺@ I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would perform that same query twice? I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the query the second time? Joe _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Suspect actions in a macro..
Hi, I don't seem to be able to see the whole thread on my iPhone, so I'm not sure that my answer is relevant. Anyway, ARSmarts offers a macro editor, and I think you could live with the free version. Best regards. Kaïs. kais.albas...@arsmarts.com Www.arsmarts.com Sent from my iPhone On 28 Feb 2013, at 07:40, Joe D'Souza wrote: > ** > The output below is exactly from there. The macro itself if opened in notepad > would not display its content in a fairly organized fashion as below. Its > readable but not as readable as from the editor. > > Cheers > > Joe > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tab Forward > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 8:10 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > Joe, > > Have you ever used armaced? > > It’s a command line based macro editor. > > You can use it to make recorded macros cleaner and easier to read. > > Tab > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 5:38 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Suspect actions in a macro.. > > > When I used armacroed for checking out a macro definition, this is what it > returned: > > 1) Set Current Working Schema to FormName (ServerName) > 2) Perform Query > Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End > Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" > 3) ** Unknown command ** >Form-open: > 4) ** Unknown command ** >Form-entry-list: 0 > 5) Perform Query > Query bar -- '536871083' >= "$Start Date$" AND '536871083' <= "$End > Date$" AND '536870932' = "Tier2 Customer Support" AND '7' = "Closed" > 6) ** Unknown command ** >Form-entry-list: 0 > 7) ** Unknown command ** >Form-final: modify☺@ > > I find it a little suspicious that the same action/query, is repeated twice. > Since I did not develop it I cannot say with certainty if this was actually > recorded twice. I suspect it was. Would this mean that this macro would > perform that same query twice? > > I am yet to test the run of these macros to log if it actually runs the query > twice. What do you’ll think? Is line 5 and 6 unnecessary and will repeat the > query the second time? > > Joe > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: > "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: "Where the > Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
