Hi Sergey, this really may not be a bug, but it is an important issue and should be corrected to make this new field really useful:
"Date_updated" field value remains empty until it is modified....This causes it to be ordered incorrectly in lists .... To avoid this behavior, field value until it's modified for the first time should be the same as "date_added" value
Hi Sergey, have you been able to think about this? We can think of a suggestion to solve this issue and some other related needs in RK ....
Would it be possible to have an option (In create new field forms) so that when creating a new record it will automatically acquire the same value from another record of the same type?
elviseras wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 14:32
Hi Sergey, have you been able to think about this?
Yes, but I'm not sure I want to change it.
elviseras wrote: ↑07 Jan 2019, 14:32
Would it be possible to have an option (In create new field forms) so that when creating a new record it will automatically acquire the same value from another record of the same type?
Hi Sergey....It's not easy to explain, but I'll try
The main and most important reason to have a "date_updated" field is to be able to sort the lists, reports, etc by last modification date...Are you right?....Then, allow me an example with the sub-entity "Documents" depending on the "Projects" main entity in which users ingest and update documents and files... Most important setup is to be able to sort so that the last modified files are displayed first... Ok?
Well, for this in "standard" lists and reports we can sort ítems by two fields "date_updated" & "date_added" to order and there is no problem ... (All is fine here)
But, the problem is for show "filter" lists (Ex, in reports or in item page configuration) because since the field "date_update" is empty if there has been no modification since its creation, there is no way to show the correct sort order commented before (We only can sort by one field !!!) .... Then, we tried to do it with filters, but if we filter by "date_updated" or by "date_added" we lost the other fields (and we can't put both filters because filters operate under the logic "AND - Y", not "OR")
The only way I see to do this behavior is that the "date_updated" field has the same date as the "date_added" field when creating the record (I suggested this solution because it makes some sense and because it's how other BBDD systems with this type of fields work) and then we could sort only by "date_updated " in a correct way
Maybe there is another way to do this, but I have not been able to find it
Would it be possible data of field "date_created" was automatically copied to data of field "date_updated" at the time record was created ?? This would solve it
Could it be done in some way with an automatic process?
.... To avoid this behavior, field value until it's modified for the first time should be the same as "date_added" value