Skip to main content
Announcements
Live today at 11 AM ET. Get your questions about Qlik Connect answered, or just listen in. SIGN UP NOW
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Not applicable

Section Access and object

Hi all, i need help.

In script of my qvw I have this section access:

SECTION ACCESS;


LOAD * INLINE [

    ACCESS, NTNAME, USERTYPE

    USER, ABA\mde, UT

    ADMIN, DELL\san, AM
]
;

Now i want that some objects or sheets are visible only to admin.

For example in a pivot table, that must be visible only to admin user, in  the lable presentation I have wrote this instruction:

Match(OSUser(), 'DELL\san')

So, if I log with the NTNAME DELL\san I can see the pivot table; while if I log as ABA\mde I can't see that table and It's ok!

Now, I have a large number of users(ADMIN and USER) and I can't write in the match instruction all the NTNAME. So i want use the Match with the field ACCESS instead of NTNAME.

But if i write in the pivot table:  Match(ACCESS, 'ADMIN')  to make visible the table only to ADMIN, It give me error.

Someone can help me?

Thanks!

3 Replies
Gysbert_Wassenaar

See here for a solution that scales to larger number of users.


talk is cheap, supply exceeds demand
Not applicable
Author

Hi Gysbert, thanks for your post but this solution is not suitable for me because I can't ask users to enter an ID when they open the application.

Does anyone have some other suggestions?

Thanks!

Not applicable
Author

I am not certain of the data that you are trying to provide data to. I encountered as similar need to the issue. I mereged my data with a section access centric qvd that performed a join to the source table.  This provided a way for use to identify the data that a user is associated with without Qlikview making the automated load joins. If you user authentication is at the domain level, use the NTNAME field.  If you are using customer user account through the Qlikview console, use the USERID.  However, I do not think I am telling you anything different than Gysbert.