Not sure I'm fully understanding what you're asking for here, but it appears that rather from accessing this data from the initial table you've screenshotted, you might want to access it from the table to which the records are linked. I.e. if "glue stick" is a record in a different table, and you have it linked to 2 different records in your primary table, you could see by downloading a csv from the table containing gluestick that it's linked 2x.
This appears to be a one-to-many relationship, and you're wanting a table of the many, not the ones.
One thing I'm definitely not clear on is item quantities; it appears as though those are stored in the many table, so you might have 2 different records for, for instance, 10 gluesticks vs. 2 gluesticks. So you'd have a line item for each quantity as opposed to a single line item for just "gluestick". Is that true?
Not sure I'm fully understanding what you're asking for here, but it appears that rather from accessing this data from the initial table you've screenshotted, you might want to access it from the table to which the records are linked. I.e. if "glue stick" is a record in a different table, and you have it linked to 2 different records in your primary table, you could see by downloading a csv from the table containing gluestick that it's linked 2x.
This appears to be a one-to-many relationship, and you're wanting a table of the many, not the ones.
One thing I'm definitely not clear on is item quantities; it appears as though those are stored in the many table, so you might have 2 different records for, for instance, 10 gluesticks vs. 2 gluesticks. So you'd have a line item for each quantity as opposed to a single line item for just "gluestick". Is that true?
Right, the tables the items are linked from "many" tables, one that lists every distinct time something was sent out ("Sent") and another that lists every distinct time something was received ("received back"). For this reason, there can be more than one quantity entry per item since, for example, we might send 10 glue sticks on a monday and then 2 more gluesticks on friday.
Essentially, I'm wondering if there is a way to streamline or export the expanded view of the site record from the initial table. When I open the MFC record for example, it contains all the information I need, but I'd like to be able to export that in the same style where each linked record is separated, rather than what happens when I export it to .csv currently where all the linked records are mashed into one cell.
Right, the tables the items are linked from "many" tables, one that lists every distinct time something was sent out ("Sent") and another that lists every distinct time something was received ("received back"). For this reason, there can be more than one quantity entry per item since, for example, we might send 10 glue sticks on a monday and then 2 more gluesticks on friday.
Essentially, I'm wondering if there is a way to streamline or export the expanded view of the site record from the initial table. When I open the MFC record for example, it contains all the information I need, but I'd like to be able to export that in the same style where each linked record is separated, rather than what happens when I export it to .csv currently where all the linked records are mashed into one cell.
Ah yeah there is no quick way to do that unfortunately. You'd likely want to export, split by delimiter, and then pivot to get an interface like that in a spreadsheet format. A
AT can only export flat csvs, so you won't find a way to get broken out sub-items natively. There might be an app on the marketplace to achieve that, however, if you go check out some of the extensions.
Ah yeah there is no quick way to do that unfortunately. You'd likely want to export, split by delimiter, and then pivot to get an interface like that in a spreadsheet format. A
AT can only export flat csvs, so you won't find a way to get broken out sub-items natively. There might be an app on the marketplace to achieve that, however, if you go check out some of the extensions.
ah ok that makes sense. thanks for the pointers!
