Hi all. I have a sample report used for training purposes that shows self joins using the Crystal ODBC sample xtreme.mdb file. We're doing a self join on the Employees table linked from the Report to field in employees to the employee ID field in the second Employees table. A formula is created from the second employee table called "Supervisor", which consists of the first and last name fields.
It's very easy to create a simple report using this scenario, listing 15 employees - showing 2 that have no data in the "report to" field.
I also created a dictionary using the same scenario - works the same.
HOWEVER - ENTER Version 9.0!! I re-created the exact same dictionary file in 9.0, and it does give me a left join, showing ALL employees, but the supervisor field is FILLED with weird data in the two fields that should have NO data. There are two symbols, hard to explain - rectangular like, and then the last name of the original employee is there. The records that DO have a match in the joined table appear just fine - it's only the unmatched records with the problem.
It appears to be a bug of some sort - but maybe I'm just missing something new?? I've created the same report in version 9.0 on the ODBC files directly (no dictionary) and get expected results - the supervisor field is empty (it should be!!)
Any thoughts? Thanks! (Overall I'm loving the changes in 9.0!!)
Cindy
It's very easy to create a simple report using this scenario, listing 15 employees - showing 2 that have no data in the "report to" field.
I also created a dictionary using the same scenario - works the same.
HOWEVER - ENTER Version 9.0!! I re-created the exact same dictionary file in 9.0, and it does give me a left join, showing ALL employees, but the supervisor field is FILLED with weird data in the two fields that should have NO data. There are two symbols, hard to explain - rectangular like, and then the last name of the original employee is there. The records that DO have a match in the joined table appear just fine - it's only the unmatched records with the problem.
It appears to be a bug of some sort - but maybe I'm just missing something new?? I've created the same report in version 9.0 on the ODBC files directly (no dictionary) and get expected results - the supervisor field is empty (it should be!!)
Any thoughts? Thanks! (Overall I'm loving the changes in 9.0!!)
Cindy