With two tables: QuestionedHashes and BadHashes, you can define this relationship in Manage | Database | relationship:
QuestionedHashes::HashField = BadHashes::HashField
On a layout based on QuestionedHashes, you can display the data in list or table view and then add the HashField from The Badhashes table to this same layout or table view.
If you then:
Enter Find Mode
Enter an asterisk * into the BadHashes::HashField
Perform the find
You'll pull up a list of all records in QuestionedHashes that have a matching record in BadHashes.
This method can also be scripted
At this point there really doesn't seem to be a need for a field in QuestionedHashes to identify which have a bad hash code as you can see what records have a match by whether or not the BadHashes::HashField field is empty or not, but you can at this point use Replace Field Contents to load a field in all the records you have found with a value that "marks" them as having a matching record.
Depending on what you need to do and how you get your data into the QuestionedHashes and BadHashes tables, there may be other methods you can implement that automatically enter data into such a field for you.
This works perfectlly - Thanks.....
I'm trying to make double duty on this database as I often have to go in the other direction. To make this clear, I named my tables Questioned Hashes and Known Hashes, with that corresponding to Questioned Hashes and Bad Hashes above. Sometimes we have to work with known good hashes and eliminate in the questioned set the good or matching hashes, leaving behind in the found set, those not found in the known set, which then become suspect.
In essence, then, my find is not for * but rather for null records in the field KnownHashes::HashField (BadHashes::HashField) as listed above. I should be able to use = in the find mode to locate null or empty records. i clearly have empty records and wish to display only those, but = returns "No records match this set of find requests".
And so * returns only records with data in this field, but the opposite is not working .....
Thoughts on this one?????
Use the *, but then specify the Omit option so that you find all records that do not have a related record. (= only works on fields local to the layout's table.)
In a script you can use the Omit record step while in find mode to create an "omit" request.
That works great!
Thanks again ....