how to circumvent expression filter limitation

[ommaha]

Hi,

I tried to filter for

id_player=23523 or id_player=34030 or id_player=30111 or id_player=23233 or id_player=19281...

, but there is a limitation to 30000 characters in the expression filter (I need 36000).

So, I tried to divide it into 2 parts which resulted in nothing because the expression filters seem to have an implicit AND between them. When I tried to start the second expression with "or" I got the message that it isn´t a valid expression anymore.

Is there a way to work around that? Maybe by either making the syntax more efficient or by having a way to use the 2 expression filters with an or? So far, I only see the option of creating a ton of expression filters like

1) not (id_player=23131 or id_player=2330 or id_player=27891 or... )
2) not (id_player=2124 or id_player=33899 or id_player=32671 or... )
3) not (id_player=2289 or id_player=31230 or id_player=30451 or... )
.
.
.
in order to filter out every player that I do not want to filter for. So, the ones that I want to filter for should remain. That would work in theory I guess, but it seems very time consuming and it probably takes the report really long to populate.

Any help would be very appreciated

[Flag_Hippo]

This format will reduce the number of characters used:

Code: Select all

cash_hand_player_statistics.id_player IN (23523, 34030, 30111, 23233, 19281)

[ommaha]

thank you very much


I found

id_player in ()

to be working aswell. Is there any relevant difference between those expressions?

[Flag_Hippo]

In this case no but for more complex queries you may need to be explicit and reference the relevant table.

[ommaha]

thank you.

is it the same considering speed of populating a report or is it faster to just address the table cash_hand_player_statistics.id_player ?

Thanks again

[Flag_Hippo]

There should be no difference in speed but you should reference the relevant table when writing complex queries that join multiple tables.