Hi

Thanks for the reply and example.

I am struggling to get this to work on my system, however.

I can see what you are doing and I get that bit but my equivalent of your allTransactions array only contains my equivalent of changed items - no product information at all so I can't relate the changes back to the parent.

I have Material & Stone where you have Product and Item. My grid has the AddRow feature enabled so I can go in and add a new stone row (ie a child) click the save button and all I get is information about the stone. I don't even get the parent'id, even though it is a column in the stone grid. I can't determine which Material the new Stone row belongs to.

I have modified your example to set EnableAddRow to true rather than false and I see the same result - the item information comes through but it has no product row id in it so  I can't determine which product to add the item to.

Can you think of a way to relate the new item rows back to the product?

Regards,

Graeme

Hi

Thanks for your answer. Unfortunately it only applies to modified rows and won't work for new ones as it just leaves me with two sets of transactions that cannot be related to each other since the parent transactions do not include the children, which is where I started with this problem.

I am rather surprised that the grid can display a hierarchical data set but it can't return hierarchical data or at the very least two sets of data with enough fields in them to derive the relationship between the two sets.

Maybe I am missing something - id & rowid look like the same value - is one of them the parent row id?

Any other suggestions?

Regards,

Graeme

Hi

I have found the parent id via a round about route, which I suspect is not future proof.

My hierarchical grid has parent rows for Material and child rows for Stone.

The following code is executed when the save button is clicked:

var oAllStoneTransactions = [];
var oMaterialChildren = $("#MaterialGrid").igHierarchicalGrid("allChildren");
for(var i= 0; i < oMaterialChildren.length;i++){
  var oStoneChild = $(oMaterialChildren[i]).data("igGrid").transactionsAsString();
  oStoneChild = oStoneChild.replace("Width", "ParentID\":\"" + $(oMaterialChildren[i]).data("igGrid").element[0].id + "\", \"Width");
  oStoneChild.parentId = $(oMaterialChildren[i]).data("igGrid").element[0].id;
  oAllStoneTransactions.push(oStoneChild);
}

The line in bold turns this:

into this:

"[{"type":"newrow","tid":"1ac1","row":{"JobStoneID":1,"StoneNumber":"11","Length":22,"ParentID":"MaterialGrid_4000008_JobStone_child", "Width":33},"rowId":1}]"

I can then parse the ParentID string to get the ID of the parent row (4000008 in this example) 

This is relying on the igGrid not changing the way it names elements and in element 0 being the parent row element. I am lucky that you chose to include the ID of the parent row in the element name of the child row but I am worried that a small change on your part will break my code.

Surely the child rows returned by transactionsAsString should include the ID of the parent row? Perhaps you could put this into the next release?

Unfortunately time preassurs on this project mean that I will have to go ahead with this bodge in the hope that you can come up with a better alternative soon.

I would still be interested in any alternatives that you can come up with that are less vulnerable. 

Regards,

Graeme

Hi Graeme! Did you solve this issue? I am very interested on this topic too. Thanks.

Hello Graeme, maybe you will be interested on this:

http://ko.infragistics.com/community/forums/p/93201/461687.aspx#461687

Greetings.