Do not input private or sensitive data. View Qlik Privacy & Cookie Policy.
Skip to main content

Announcements
Qlik GA: Multivariate Time Series in Qlik Predict: Get Details
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Fenil
Contributor III
Contributor III

Want to clear the selection for the table From the sheet which is not using that field

Hi Everyone,

So right now I have 6 sheets from 2 independent table used, 3 sheet are using only Current order table field and other 2 only using Hisotrical order table, like below diagram I have made.

Fenil_0-1733479412307.png


So from the historical order table sheet's if i select H_Orderno or any other field and I go to sheet of Current order table, I don't want to see above selection for H_Orderno, Because it can confuse the user.

Now I know I can add actions in each sheet for the field I want to ignore, But these all sheets are summary tables and contains more than 40 fields per sheet, So I have to add 40 actions per sheet which equals per 6 sheets is 240 Actions which is time consuming and I think can impact the performance.

So do we have any other solution to get away from this situation?

Thanks,
Fenil Jain.

Labels (2)
2 Replies
nhenckel
Luminary
Luminary

Direct Answer to the Question:

There isn’t a built-in way in Qlik Sense to dynamically clear selections for multiple fields (wildcard) from one table when navigating between sheets. Instead, any field-specific clearing requires manually creating actions for each field, which can be cumbersome if there are many fields. However, there are two practical approaches to address this:

  1. Using Bookmarks:

    • Create a bookmark with no selections applied.
    • Add a single action to each sheet that applies this bookmark when the user navigates to that sheet. This ensures irrelevant selections (e.g., H_OrderNo) are cleared automatically.

  2. Splitting the App:

    • If the workflows for Historical and Current Orders are largely independent, consider splitting the app into two separate apps:
      • One for Historical Orders.
      • Another for Current Orders.
    • This ensures selections remain relevant and reduces confusion while keeping the data models more focused.

Guidance for Improving the Data Model:

Looking at the app structure in your diagram, I’d recommend consolidating the Current Order Table and Historical Order Table into a single table. This simplifies the app and avoids many of these issues. Here’s how you can do it:

  1. Add a "Type" Field:

    • Introduce a new field (e.g., OrderType) that identifies whether each row belongs to "Current" or "Historical" orders.
  2. Concatenate the Tables:

    • Combine the fields (OrderNo, Location, and Status) from both tables into one unified table, using the OrderType field to differentiate between the two datasets. The result would look like this:
    OrderNo Location Status OrderType
    1 ABC Pending Current
    2 DEF Dispatched Current
    11 ABC Delivered Historical
    12 DEF Delivered Historical
  3. Use Actions to Apply Filters Dynamically:

    • For Historical Order sheets, add an action that applies a filter for OrderType = 'Historical' when navigating to those sheets.
    • For Current Order sheets, add an action that applies a filter for OrderType = 'Current'.

Why This Approach Works Better:

  • Simplified Data Model: Consolidating the tables removes the need for duplicated fields (H_OrderNo, OrderNo) and makes the app more maintainable.
  • Better Performance: A single table is more efficient for Qlik Sense to process than two separate tables.
  • Improved User Experience: Users won’t be confused by irrelevant filters carrying over between unrelated sheets, as the filters will now be applied dynamically based on the sheet context.

Recommendation:

While the direct approaches using bookmarks or splitting the app are feasible, consolidating the data model with a single table is the most robust and scalable solution. It aligns with best practices in Qlik Sense and reduces the overall complexity of the app.

Fenil
Contributor III
Contributor III
Author

Hi @nhenckel Thanks for reply, We will check what we can use from above solution you have provided.