List:MySQL ODBC« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Daniel D. Reid Date:July 15 1999 6:53pm
Subject:RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBC
View as plain text  
Patrick / David,

Thanks, that did the trick.  I will keep this in mind as I develop further
apps.

Dan Reid
MIS Technical Administrator
Pilot Catastrophe Services, Inc.
v: (334) 607-7747
f: (334) 607-9039
http://www.pilotcat.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Sherrill [mailto:patrick@stripped]
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 12:59 PM
> To: Daniel D. Reid; dcarlson@stripped
> Cc: myodbc@stripped
> Subject: Re: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBC
>
>
> You need a timestamp(14) and a unique field/column.
>
> Pat...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Daniel D. Reid <ddreid@stripped>
> To: <dcarlson@stripped>
> Cc: <myodbc@stripped>
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 1:44 PM
> Subject: RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBC
>
>
> > David,
> >
> > Do I understand you correctly, I NEED to have a date field
> in my table (I
> > don't now) in order for Access to properly distinguish
> individual records?
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David Carlson [mailto:dcarlson@stripped]
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 12:17 PM
> > > To: 'Daniel D. Reid'
> > > Subject: RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBC
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Dan
> > >
> > > Back to basics... This sounds like the error you get when you
> > > do not have a
> > > date field in the table. Access seems to have trouble
> > > distinguishing records
> > > unless a date field is present.
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Daniel D. Reid [mailto:ddreid@stripped]
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 9:42 AM
> > > To: myodbc@stripped
> > > Subject: RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBC
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Colin McKinnon [mailto:colin@stripped]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 10:16 AM
> > > > To: myodbc@stripped
> > > > Subject: Re: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBC
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At 09:53 15/07/99 -0500, Daniel D. Reid wrote:
> > > > >Greetings,
> > > > >
> > > > >I am trying to set up a MySQL database that will
> accept online job
> > > > >applications via the web and then allow our HR department to
> > > > view these apps
> > > > >on their desktops via Access over a MyODBC link.  I have
> > > been able to
> > > > >accomplish this with Access'97 but I am having great
> > > > difficulty in getting
> > > > >it to work under Access 2000 which my company is moving
> > > > towards.  Are there
> > > > >different config options for 2000 vs. '97?
> > > > >
> > > > >As an example, I tried to export an identical native Access
> > > > database from
> > > > >both versions.  The '97 ver worked where the 2000 ver
> > > > failed.  I got the
> > > > >following error from Access 2000:
> > > > >
> > > > > ODBC-call failed.
> > > > > [Microsoft][ODBC Driver Manager]Information type out of
> > > > range (#0)
> > > > >
> > > > >After going through the MySQL log on our server (RedHat
> > > > 5.2), I can see the
> > > > >'97 queries that create the table and then fills it via
> > > > multiple INSERT INTO
> > > > >queries.  The 2000 create query however is malformed.  It
> > > > has the 'CREATE
> > > > >TABLE' syntax but no table name to create.  It also has
> > > > after that the list
> > > > >of field types but no names.
> > > > <snip>
> > > > Hi Daniel,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry if I haven't understood the issue but .....
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the specific problem you cited - I presume that you
> > > > have attached
> > > > tables in a database and are trying to import the 97 version
> > > > into the 2000
> > > > version, while the data remains on the MySQL server? Version
> > > > compatibility
> > > > for more esoteric functions has often been a bit dodgy with
> > > > MS. Have you
> > > > looked at the definitions and properties of the attached
> > > > tables once you've
> > > > imported them? I'd suggest that you import the
> database, delete any
> > > > attached tables then reattach them in Access 2000.
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > >
> > > > Colin
> > > >
> > > Colin,
> > >
> > > My original problem was that while I could view the data in
> > > the MySQL table
> > > from Access 2000, I could not modify it.  Whenever I would go
> > > to save my
> > > modifications, an error box would pop up stating that there
> > > was a Write
> > > Conflict with another user and asking whether I wanted to
> > > copy my change to
> > > the clipboard or drop the change.  I know for a fact that no
> > > other user is
> > > accessing the MySQL table through ODBC or native MySQL
> > > clients during this
> > > process.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Thread
Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDaniel D. Reid15 Jul
  • Re: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCColin McKinnon15 Jul
    • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCStephen Dahl15 Jul
      • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDan15 Jul
        • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCJakub Linowski15 Jul
          • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDan17 Jul
    • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDaniel D. Reid15 Jul
      • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCJakub Linowski15 Jul
  • Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCMichael Widenius30 Jul
    • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDaniel D. Reid31 Jul
RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDaniel D. Reid15 Jul
  • Re: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCPatrick Sherrill15 Jul
    • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCDaniel D. Reid15 Jul
      • RE: Access 2000 vs. Access'97 with MyODBCPaul DuBois17 Jul