The fact that the stored procedure (SP) is stored as uspTest;1 in the
database window is an old bug of Access 2000 that has been corrected with a
service pack; I suppose that the latest SP has not been installed on your
machine. Update your computer with the latest SP - including SP for Office
and the MDAC and JET SP8 - and you should be OK. See
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/data/aa937730.aspx
There has been a big change between SQL-2000 and 2005 with regards to the
schema (dbo here in your case) of the database objects. In SQL-2000, this
is strongly related to the owner of each object but it's no longer the case
in SQL-2005
Did you try with either « EXEC uspTEST » or with uspTest but with setting
the Record Source Qualifier property set to dbo ?
You should also take a look with the SQL-Server Profiler in order to see
what's going on between Access and the sql-server.
--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Windows Live Platform
Email: sylvain2009 sylvainlafontaine com (fill the blanks, no spam please)
Independent consultant and remote programming for Access and SQL-Server
(French)
"HJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi all,
>
> We currently have a Microsoft Access 2000 ADP and SQL Server 2000. Now we
> are migrating to a new database server with SQL Server 2005.
>
> In the ADP we have reports with the record source set to a stored
> procedure, e.g. uspTest.
>
> We are testing the Access 2000 ADP against the new SQL Server 2005 server
> and we cannot get the reports working. We have tried the following record
> sources:
>
> uspTest
> dbo.uspTest
> EXEC dbo.uspTest
> EXEC dbo.uspTest;1 (since this is how the stored procedure is listed in
> the database window)
>
> Every time the error message says "The record source '<record source>'
> specified on this form or report does not exist". How can we get the
> reports working?
>
> We also tested the ADP in Microsoft Access 2003; this is working very
> well. But, however and very unfortunately, everbody is still using Office
> 2000 and the company is not (yet) willing to upgrade.
>
> Any help is much appreciated,
>
> HJ