T
terryb
As others in this group have reported, Access 2000 seems to have a problem updating text fields through queries where they exceed 127 characters.
I’m looking here because I’ve found the same problem. I have a ‘notes’ field in a requirements tracking database that I’m setting up, which describes how I want my components to interact to meet a particular requirement. This is set in an update query:
UPDATE RequirementCrossReference SET RequirementCrossReference.Annotation = [Forms]![Requirements]![AnnotationText]
WHERE ((([RequirementCrossReference]![Requirement Number])=[Forms]![Requirements]![Req Num]) AND (([RequirementCrossReference]![Component Ref])=[Forms]![Requirements]![AnnotatedComponent]));
Open the table and type in 128 characters (or more up to 255) and the table is fine. Try to do it through the above query and the “Invalid Argument†error pops up. Do it with 127 characters and the update works. The table field can be a Text or Memo with no difference in the behaviour.
I notice that there are other queries in this group reporting the same 127 limit in various other queries, and have concluded Access has a problem. (Not a criticism, merely an observation!) The question is, is there a fix?
I’m looking here because I’ve found the same problem. I have a ‘notes’ field in a requirements tracking database that I’m setting up, which describes how I want my components to interact to meet a particular requirement. This is set in an update query:
UPDATE RequirementCrossReference SET RequirementCrossReference.Annotation = [Forms]![Requirements]![AnnotationText]
WHERE ((([RequirementCrossReference]![Requirement Number])=[Forms]![Requirements]![Req Num]) AND (([RequirementCrossReference]![Component Ref])=[Forms]![Requirements]![AnnotatedComponent]));
Open the table and type in 128 characters (or more up to 255) and the table is fine. Try to do it through the above query and the “Invalid Argument†error pops up. Do it with 127 characters and the update works. The table field can be a Text or Memo with no difference in the behaviour.
I notice that there are other queries in this group reporting the same 127 limit in various other queries, and have concluded Access has a problem. (Not a criticism, merely an observation!) The question is, is there a fix?