I have the MaterialSample table as a subview in the DNASequence table. In Specify 6 it works well, in the image below the “+” button under the SRA heading (my caption for the material sample subview) is green, I can add new entries. But in Specify 7 the “+” button is grayed out. Do I have to do something in Specify 7 to make it work?
I have been unable to display MaterialSample as a functioning subview on the DNASequence form while testing this out in Specify 6. Could you share a copy of the XML view def file that you’re using? It would be helpful to see how these table views are defined on your end.
According to this (Specify Database Schema Update for Tissues, DNA Extracts, Sequence Data, DNASequence Runs, Primers, and NGS data) the relationship does not work that way. The material sample table is a subview of the preparation table and the DNA sequence table is a subview of the material sample table. Something must be off here. Are you sure your SRA table is the Material Sample table?
Hi @bronwyncombs, thanks for looking into this. Here is my fish.views file (it’s a bit messy, work in progress).
After reading Andy’s reply, it is strange that the way I used these views works in Specify 6! I hope there’s nothing weird in my Specify installation.
fish.views.xml (128.3 KB)
Yes, my SRA table is the MaterialSample table but as you explained I used it wrong in relation to the DNASequences table. Thanks for pointing out the update to the database schema.
So that explains why my MaterialSample table does not work in Specify 7 but now the strange thing is that it did work in Specify 6!
I wonder whether the direct relationship between DNASequences and CollectionObject is going to be maintained in future Schema updates.
Thanks so much for sending that!! As Andy relayed, MaterialSample as a subview of DNASequence is no longer supported in 7.
After some more testing in 6, we were able to get MaterialSample under DNASequence like you said!
As for the direct relationship between DNASequences and CollectionObject, we are confident this will remain in the future to maintain compatibility.
I guess that means there is something weird with 6.
Good to know!