Corrupted Database Record

[Guest]

Hi Jill,

I do not see your original question in the MS web portal:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...cess&mid=f39f0ec1-be5f-4f8a-8c0c-dfd2f316636e

However, based on some replies that I see, you may find this document helpful:

Implementing a Successful Multiuser Access/JET Application
http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/multiuser_applications.html

Consider breaking any memo, hyperlink or OLE Object data types out to a
separate table, related 1:1. The reason I make this statement is due to this
quote:

"Also, record-level locking is not enabled for Memo data types."

which you can find in this KB article:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/275561
See the section titled: "Record-level locking".


Tom Wickerath
Microsoft Access MVP

http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/expert_contributors.html
http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/search.html
__________________________________________

 

[larrylinsonjr]

Granny;

moving from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005.. it doesn't require testing; it
doesn't require anything. Attach / detach, or backup / restore. It's
not like it's going to be buggy-- there AREN'T ANY PROBLEMS moving from
2000 to 2005-- so it's a complete non-issue.

I still disagree with the basic tenant of your argument... I haven't
seen ANYTHING that says that SQL 2000 _DATA_ can't be connected to
using a Vista desktop. Yeah; we can't run MSDE on a Vista desktop; big
friggin deal... lol

I personally have used Vista to connect to SQL 2000 data.. and I sure
haven't had a drop of a problem with it.

So why don't you give more justification for your argument?

You still don't understand the difference between a SERVER and a
DESKTOP

-Larry Linson, Jr

 

[John Vinson]

Granny;

moving from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005.. it doesn't require testing; it
doesn't require anything. Attach / detach, or backup / restore. It's
not like it's going to be buggy-- there AREN'T ANY PROBLEMS moving from
2000 to 2005-- so it's a complete non-issue.

That's pretty despicable, Aaron.

Note to readers: this is Aaron Kempf, not Larry Linson.


John W. Vinson[MVP]

 

[aaron.kempf]

it's pretty despicable that you're promoting a database engine THAT
DOESNT WORK WELL ENOUGH FOR A SINGLE RECORD AND A SINGLE USER.

Did my post threaten the life of anyone?
NO

Do your crappy ass database systems threaten LIVES?

they sure do


What happens when the little MDB that you wrote for the ambulance
company; what happens when you have unexplained locking errors and a
data entry clerk doesn't know how to counteract record locking
messages?

What happens?

You stupid MDB script kids are the ones that are pretty despicable
Fat lazy retards are too mentally challenged to learn Access Data
Projects.

Punk ass kids spreading mis-information


-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

and for the record; I speak the truth.

Home-Fag is spreading information saying that a Vista DESKTOP won't be
able to connect to a SQL Server 2000 machine?

ROFL

the only thing that Vista can't do -- is RUN SQL 2000; kids

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

oh.. let me guess 'we dont build mission-critical databases'

THERE IS A CERTAIN EFFICIENCY FROM USING A SINGLE DATABASE FORMAT FOR
ALL APPLICATIONS.

ADP is _EASIER_DEVELOPMENT_ than MDB.
ADP is _EASIER_ADMINISTRATION_ than MDB.


I don't get 'corrupted database record' messages in SQL Server.

PICKING AND CHOOSING WHEN TO USE MDB / ADP WOULD TAKE TOO MUCH TIME IN
ANALYSIS-PARALYSIS.

DO THINGS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME OR RE-ENGINEER A SOLUTION EVERYTIME YOU
HIT 25MB OF DATA

ROFL

-Aaron

 

[Joseph Meehan]

Tom Wickerath wrote:
....

"Also, record-level locking is not enabled for Memo data types."

That explains a lot.

 

[aaron.kempf]

listen BITCH
I am NOT a lunatic

ADP are NOT depecrated
They DO work better than MDB in a trillion different ways.

I don't need to compact & repair; i dont need to link tables.. I don't
need to copy tables / queries.

I can use my ADP over wireless, LAN, WAN, VPN; you can't use MDB over 3
out of those 4 options

I don't see SQL Server going away anytime soon lol
I can out-develop you MDB kids with a platform that is MORE SCALABLE
and MORE RELIABLE.

MDB isn't effective for a single user and a single record.
and David Fenton is a fairy that doesn't have the mental capacity to
adapt to change.

ADP are not going away you retard; they have been greatly modified in
each of the last 4 versions of Office (2000,2002,2003,2007).

When was the last time that MDB got a new FEATURE?
a single feature?

SHAREPOINT?

ROFL-- it doesnt work fast enough!

XML? yeah.. that's a decent feature; I use it pretty often.

What FEATURES has ADP gotten over the past 10 years?

oh yeah; let me guess you can't even SPELL ADP can you diptard??

lose the training wheels cocksucker

-Aaron

 

[dbahooker]

please buddy; let me know if you still disagree

if you can't hang with the big dogs; get back on the porch

-Aaron

 

[dbahooker]

Granny Swallows

for the record; here is a clarification from Microsoft

using ADP on VISTA against SQL 2000 isn't going to be a problem

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/faq-sql_on_vista.mspx

Q. Can Windows Vista access a SQL Server 2000 database on a separate
server?
A. Yes, applications that are compatible with Windows Vista can access
a SQL Server 2000 databases on a separate server.