When dredging up older data from two tables that *should*
have been related but weren't, I've managed to get them
related, and spiffed up for appending to the linked tables
in my current db.

What I'm unsure about, is whether or not I need to do the
append in steps, or if I can do it all at once.

My level of expertise only allows the two step plan, where I
would append the main table data first, and then be able to
fetch the autonumbered Id field value (the new key) to
update in the child table (using the old keys), and then
append that one.

Is there anything better, short of pages of code that make
my hair catch fire?
--
Thanks,tbl

Yes, it will be a 2-stage operation: appending the primary record first, so
you have the new primary key value, and then using that value for the
foreign key of the related table.

Since it sounds like this is a one-off operation, it is probably not worth
writing the code to automate this process.

--
Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

"tbl" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> When dredging up older data from two tables that *should*
> have been related but weren't, I've managed to get them
> related, and spiffed up for appending to the linked tables
> in my current db.
>
> What I'm unsure about, is whether or not I need to do the
> append in steps, or if I can do it all at once.
>
> My level of expertise only allows the two step plan, where I
> would append the main table data first, and then be able to
> fetch the autonumbered Id field value (the new key) to
> update in the child table (using the old keys), and then
> append that one.
>
> Is there anything better, short of pages of code that make
> my hair catch fire?
> --
> Thanks,tbl

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:21:44 +0800, "Allen Browne"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Yes, it will be a 2-stage operation: appending the primary record first, so
>you have the new primary key value, and then using that value for the
>foreign key of the related table.
>
>Since it sounds like this is a one-off operation, it is probably not worth
>writing the code to automate this process.


Thanks Allen. Backing up, gritting teeth, getting set. <g>
--
tbl