J
Jonathan
So here is my question. I'm building a rather simple db consisting of a
parent child and child table in a one-to-many relationship (based on the
Parent's ID and the Child's "ParentID" field). For the intended workflow,data
will be regularly entered by importing or cutting and pasting records from an
Excel worksheet. The worksheet rows will contain both parent data and child
data and I've set up a query so this can proceed smoothly. But the result is
that much of the parent data is duplicated. Is there a way for me to automate
the process whereby, after import, duplicate parent records are identified
(say, by one or two matching fields, perhaps more) and the children of the
duplicate parent records can have their ParentID field reassigned to the
first of the duplicate parent records?
This is a problem I've never dealt with before and intrigues me. My users
all have very little experience so it needs to be simple (one or two clicks
perhaps?)
Let me know if I need to explain further.
AND very importantly, an unfortunately, this has to be implemented in Access
2000, though in 6 months I might be upgrading.
Thanks much,
Jonathan
parent child and child table in a one-to-many relationship (based on the
Parent's ID and the Child's "ParentID" field). For the intended workflow,data
will be regularly entered by importing or cutting and pasting records from an
Excel worksheet. The worksheet rows will contain both parent data and child
data and I've set up a query so this can proceed smoothly. But the result is
that much of the parent data is duplicated. Is there a way for me to automate
the process whereby, after import, duplicate parent records are identified
(say, by one or two matching fields, perhaps more) and the children of the
duplicate parent records can have their ParentID field reassigned to the
first of the duplicate parent records?
This is a problem I've never dealt with before and intrigues me. My users
all have very little experience so it needs to be simple (one or two clicks
perhaps?)
Let me know if I need to explain further.
AND very importantly, an unfortunately, this has to be implemented in Access
2000, though in 6 months I might be upgrading.
Thanks much,
Jonathan