Yes, that I know! :-)
What I meant was whether it would go through all BE connections in the FE
which I found out when I ran it.
Thanks mate, saved me another nervous breakdown. Owe you yet another...
before it gets out of hand do drop me a line (I'll send my email add to the
one on the site if that's OK with you) when you head towards KL.
Alp
"Allen Browne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4083bddb$0$16594$(E-Mail Removed)...
> No. The code goes in the front end.
> It is when the user opens the front end that you need to check the back
end
> data is available.
>
> --
> 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.
>
> "Alp Bekisoglu" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Thank you once again Allen. Sorry I was decommissioned for the nigth so
> > could not respond earlier.
> >
> > Just one more (and maybe unnecessary) question to make sure: this code
> > should go through all backends (in this case 2) without the necessity of
> two
> > similar routines depicting each backend based tables, right?
> >
> > Alp
> >
> > "Allen Browne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:40827d98$0$16590$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > There is an example here:
> > > http://allenbrowne.com/ser-13.html
> > > that shows how to reconnect the linked tables, on the assumption that
> the
> > > back end is in the same folder as the front end.
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > "Alp Bekisoglu" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > >
> > > > I have been fighting over this for sometime now but unfortunately
came
> > to
> > > > the end of my wits. I am trying to use code in a database to check
its
> > > table
> > > > references for proper operation. The conditions are somewhat simple
> such
> > > as;
> > > > - Front-end and Back-end databases are exactly under the same
> > subdirectory
> > > > - the routine is called from the Front-end
> > > > - One Back-end has quite a number of tables that needs to be checked
> for
> > > > these references, the orher has much less (7 to be accurate)
> > > >
> > > > What I intend to do is to force the application to go through the
> > routine
> > > > without user intervention and check & update all link references if
> they
> > > > have been changed somehow. The link references do not change under
> > normal
> > > > circumstances.
> > > >
> > > > I have my functions that return the full path, full directory
> structure,
> > > > just needed database file name, only the drive letter, etc... built
in
> > and
> > > > do not have any problems working with them.
> > > >
> > > > I have also re-named the smaller set of linked tables (the 7) with
the
> > > "b_"
> > > > prefix just to distinguish them easier to use the relevant mdb.
> > > >
> > > > I can get all the necessary connection info through the above
> functions
> > > but
> > > > unfortunately am getting stuck where I can pass them on to the FE in
> VBA
> > > > that the info will be updated. Thus it looks like I need to modify
one
> > of
> > > > the several codes I have found over the net and this is where I am
> > kindly
> > > > asking you expertise and help.
> > > >
> > > > I am ready to give further details if any is needed. I have one link
> set
> > > to
> > > > look elsewhere (other than the directory the main app is running)
for
> > > > testing.
> > > > What I need is:
> > > > - If the table name starts with "b_" then its link should be set to
> > > > ";DATABASE=" & baselocation
> > > > - Else their links should be set to ";DATABASE=" & datalocation
> > > > - If any is wrong, then correct it
> > > >
> > > > Both baselocation and datalocation yield fully qualified file names,
> > i.e.
> > > > D:\Program Files\Myprogram\base.mdb
> > > >
> > > > I thank in advance for any help, guidance that would/could be extend
> to
> > > me.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Similar Threads
