How to Find the last record in an access table forvb.net?

[abhi sri]

i have an application for which i have to find the last record of my table in ms access. i am using a oledb connection and im not able to find a relevent property like End Of File(EOF) in vb.net. please help me as soon as posssible...

EggHeadCafe - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
http://www.eggheadcafe.com

 

[PvdG42]

i have an application for which i have to find the last record of my table
in ms access. i am using a oledb connection and im not able to find a
relevent property like End Of File(EOF) in vb.net. please help me as soon
as posssible...

EggHeadCafe - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
http://www.eggheadcafe.com

If you're dealing with the data through a binding source, this may help. If
it doesn't, more details about your app will be helpful to others who may
have better suggestions.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.windows.forms.bindingsource.movelast(VS.80).aspx

 

[Jeff Johnson]

i have an application for which i have to find the last record of my table
in ms access.
i am using a oledb connection and im not able to find a relevent property
like End
Of File(EOF) in vb.net.

Nor are you likely to find a VB.NET answer in a C# group....

 

[J.B. Moreno]

What did they tell you in the VB.NET newsgroup...?

Hopefully that tables don't have first, last, or middle rows. Tables
are unordered.

 

[Jeff Johnson]

Clustered indexes...?

In reality, yes, there is a first, last, middle, etc., but in set theory
those things don't exist...even though they do....

 

[J.B. Moreno]

Clustered indexes...?

Is an index on one or more columns in a table, not the table itself.

Te table itself is unordered, and you can't depend upon on any
accidental order that may appear.

 

[J.B. Moreno]

No it isn't...

If the index contains the row data in Access (as it does in MS SQL)
then that's still just an implementation detail, not something mandated
by the concept of clustered index.

Unless it has a clustered index...

Unless it is a clustered index and the DB is DB2. In which case order
can slip over time and you'll have to use REORG to get it back into a
perfect cluster.

A clustered index is a hint to the database that when searching/reading
a row in a table with value X for a particular column, then there's a
good change that the next row to be fetched will have the "next" value
of X for that column.

It doesn't mandate that the database developer create a specific
structure or put the data on the disk in a particular order.

A table is unordered.

 

[J.B. Moreno]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa933131(SQL.80).aspx - first
line...

The OP was talking about Access, you're referencing MS SQL, so I
counter with
<http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/wikis/display/data/Best+Practice+-+Ph
ysical+Database+Design+-+05.+Index+design+-+5.1.+Clustering+indexes>
(3rd line, where it says "will attempt").

Anyway, yes, in practice, for *MS SQL 2000, a clustered index defines a
physical order on disk -- big deal, it *always* had a physical order on
disk (not a defined sequential order it's true, but an order).

And it still doesn't guarantee an order of rows for a select statement
without an order by clause (a cache can cause "out of order" sequences


*It doesn't for 2005/2008 or at least it doesn't for partitioned tables.

 

[Himadri S. Biswas]

It is not proper time to me to reply this problem.
Better I will solve this problem later, because I am also looking
solution of it.
Bye.