B
Brad Pears
here's a strange one in Access 2000...
I have a table that contains a "country" field to identify a record related
to a specific country - if need be... This field is NOT required. It would
only have a country code in there (i.e. USA, CDA) if the row pertains to
that country only...
So, I did a query where I only want rows that are not = "USA"... (I wanted
all rows having country code = "CDA" and any that country code that is blank
or null)
The criteria I entered for country was <> "USA".
When I ran it, the query did not return any rows that had a null value for
the country - as I thought it would. I had to include "is null or <> USA" in
order to get all rows also having null values...
Should I have expected this?? I did not - and now am wondering how many
other queries I have that possibly may not be returning the correct number
of rows...
Is this by design or is there something amiss??
Thanks,
Brad
I have a table that contains a "country" field to identify a record related
to a specific country - if need be... This field is NOT required. It would
only have a country code in there (i.e. USA, CDA) if the row pertains to
that country only...
So, I did a query where I only want rows that are not = "USA"... (I wanted
all rows having country code = "CDA" and any that country code that is blank
or null)
The criteria I entered for country was <> "USA".
When I ran it, the query did not return any rows that had a null value for
the country - as I thought it would. I had to include "is null or <> USA" in
order to get all rows also having null values...
Should I have expected this?? I did not - and now am wondering how many
other queries I have that possibly may not be returning the correct number
of rows...
Is this by design or is there something amiss??
Thanks,
Brad