Skip to main content

Hello IFS Community,

has anyone tried doing a pure “AND” search in, for example, a Part Description?  I mean where the terms you are searching for appear anywhere in the Part Description, not necessarily in the order you define them in the search.  It seems the issue here is that the search parameter “;” has subtly changed from “AND” to “OR” in IFS Cloud from Apps 10.  The closest I could get was, for example, “~WLL;~20” in Basic search and then going in to Advanced and changing the “OR” to “AND” to give the desired correct search result.  Meaning this quite basic pure “AND” search function is not completely available in a Basic cloud search.  My Customer would need to frequently look up Parts by multiple search terms appearing anywhere in the Part Description.  Please advise if you have encountered this issue also. 

Hi, @LaurenceChapman, This issue is all too familiar. Unfortunately, that's how the UI works at this point. The UI search works fine in simple scenario's looking for one or a multitude of values in a single column. If however you want to use AND you immediately have to switch to advanced, making this filtering very difficult (I need to look up the format most of the time and IM A TECHNICAL APPLICATION MANAGER).

In this specific case, I would use the % wildcard. Meanining “%WLL%20%”, that might solve your scenario.

Thanks @JoDe for your answer.  Much appreciated.  I just tested the “%WLL%20%” and again this is order dependent.  IE it will only return results where “WLL” appears before “20” in the Part description.  So it is not what I’m calling a Pure AND operator.  Still can’t believe this is not available in a Basic search.  It really is bread and butter.  Hopefully IFS Benelux will take this up directly with IFS R&D asap.

Yeah, switching to advanced is the only way I think. I know it’s not helping your question, but for what it’s worth, “;” in a field always translated to “OR” in the search/query dialogue, all the way back to IFS Applications 98 if my memory serves me right.

Hi @LaurenceChapman, I would suggest making a IFS idea for this, but I don't think it will get a high priority (just to manage expectations). 

If you share the number here afterwards I'll upvote it. 

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings