Text 3654, 171 rader
Skriven 2005-04-13 23:13:46 av Robert Comer (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 3652 av Robert Comer (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: MS Access ODBC bug yields wrong data
================================================
From: "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com>

Never mind, I'm not sure what I was thinking...

- Bob Comer


"Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:425dd999@w3.nls.net...
> If you're linking the table in with code rather than the add link table
> wizard, that would explain that.
>
> - Bob Comer
>
>
> "Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message
> news:5j3r5198j08nr3idn9cs1v8dpghplrnle7@4ax.com...
>>
>> THERE IS NO POP-UP DIALOG THAT WE ARE SEEING.
>>
>> /M
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:41:18 -0700, Ellen K.
>> <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote:
>>
>>>WHAT HAPPENS IF WHEN YOU LINK THE TABLE TO SPECIFY THE COLUMN(S) THAT
>>>MAKE UP THE PRIMARY KEY IN RESPONSE TO THE POPUP DIALOG?
>>>
>>>On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:59:28 -0400, Mike '/m' <mike@barkto.com> wrote in
>>>message <l6ko5198b6p58pss1kif6ftevn9nig1ka3@4ax.com>:
>>>
>>>>>You know what I meant. <g>
>>>>
>>>>Yup.  Just instilling some levity here.  You need a sense of humor when
>>>>working with MS Access, I'm finding out.
>>>>
>>>>btw, take this SQL statement [please!]
>>>>
>>>> SELECT DA_PROD_ORDERS.ORDERNUMBER, DA_PROD_ORDERS.ORDERID,
>>>> DA_PROD_ORDERS.PDEMPLOYEEID
>>>> FROM DA_PROD_ORDERS
>>>> WHERE (((DA_PROD_ORDERS.PDEMPLOYEEID)=94));
>>>>
>>>>When we run it in MS Access, the result set contains records of
>>>>employees whose employee ID is not 94.  It contains the correct number
>>>>of records, but wrong records.
>>>>
>>>>When we run that same SQL statement via Oracle's PC client software, the
>>>>result set is correct.
>>>>
>>>>When we change the name of the primary indices according to the KB
>>>>article, the result set that MS Access returns is correct.
>>>>
>>>>>ODBC's a strange beast at times -- MS isn't the only one that doesn't
>>>>>do it
>>>>>right all the time. :(
>>>>
>>>>While I agree with that, the problem here appears to be in the manner
>>>>that MS Access is using ODBC.  It is using the wrong API to obtain the
>>>>primary index, and therefore has to guess which index is the primary
>>>>index.
>>>>
>>>>  /m
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:12:29 -0400, "Robert Comer"
>>>><bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> It's not my problem, it is Microsoft's problem.  I am just the
>>>>>> unlucky
>>>>>> person who is suffering because of it.  ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>You know what I meant. <g>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If MS Access used this call, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
>>>>>> The MSDN page says that API call was present since ODBC v1.0.
>>>>>
>>>>>ODBC's a strange beast at times -- MS isn't the only one that doesn't
>>>>>do it
>>>>>right all the time. :(
>>>>>
>>>>>- Bob Comer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:h7sl519gq6u2rne02i1tq6jq32tbf8e1d3@4ax.com...
>>>>>> >so I doubt I would see Mike's problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not my problem, it is Microsoft's problem.  I am just the
>>>>>> unlucky
>>>>>> person who is suffering because of it.  ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> btw,
>>>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/odbc/ht
m/odbcsqlprimarykeys.asp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If MS Access used this call, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
>>>>>> The MSDN page says that API call was present since ODBC v1.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /m
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:33:44 -0400, "Robert Comer"
>>>>>> <bobcomer_removeme@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   And another person who didn't read the article.  The ODBC API
>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>> identify the primary index.<
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>No Rich, I read this one, and I knew it didn't provide that info
>>>>>>>before
>>>>>>>anyway, I use ODBC a **LOT**.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I was just curious why the difference (if there is one).  I tend to
>>>>>>>make
>>>>>>>logicals (Views, I guess, you would call them in SQL speak) on the
>>>>>>>AS/400
>>>>>>>for performance, access, so I doubt I would see Mike's problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- Bob Comer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:425a933c@w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>   And another person who didn't read the article.  The ODBC API
>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>identify the primary index.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  "Robert Comer" <bobcomer_removeme@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:425a752b$1@w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>  I'm wondering why Access doesn't ask what the primary key is when
>>>>>>> linking
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>  table -- it does with the AS/400 DB2 driver I use.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  - Bob Comer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  "Mike N." <mike@u-spam-u-die.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>  news:tprk51dp17eh1b9ngfg016v34ve7mokpb0@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>  > On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:39:25 -0400, Mike '/m' <mike@barkto.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>  >>Note that the KB article says that "Microsoft Access may select
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>  >>wrong index..."  As much as you would like it to be the case, the
>>>>>>>  >>problem has nothing to do with Oracle.
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>  >   Is there a product that competes with Microsoft Access that
>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> given
>>>>>>>  > the same query of the same ODBC connection and faced with the 2
>>>>>>> indexes,
>>>>>>>  > DOES pick the correct index for the right reason - not just luck?
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)