Access2003 Records being #Deleted.

[jmillerWV]

I am having a problem and cannot get it fixed. I am running Access2k3 with
all servicer packs and patches for Access as well as the Jet. About 5 months
ago I moved from Access97 to Access2k3 (went beyond the 1GB A97 limit) after
this we get a record deleted nad then thew record shows #Deleted in each
field. There seems to be no logical explanation for this. We have 8 to 9
dataentry people and the deletions happen at no set times. All can be working
and it will happen or only one person can be on the DB and it will happen.
Also it does not always happen in the same data entry screen. Any ideas what
may be happening? ( more info I back up the db each night and when I make any
changes, as well as compact and repair each night before going home. Also I
have it set that each morning when the user logs onto the network thye are
forced to get the "frontend" from the server that way everyone is working
with the same "frontend".
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[aaron.kempf]

I've never had to move platforms when I hit the 1gb limit.
Of course, I use SQL Server.

I'd just reccomend moving to SQL Server if you've got this much data.

Access Data Projects will allow you to keep a lot of your existing
investment in MS Access Forms and Reports.

Any way you look at it-- nobody is stupid enough to use Microsoft
Access with a 1gb table.

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[jmillerWV]

Thanks for the reply. and thanks for refering to those of us who use Access
for a larger than 1gb databse as STUPID as Miscrosoft says it will go to 2 gb
we should believe them, if not then they should say that it is not
recommended to run a DB any bigger than 1 gb for the STUPID people that use
their products.

 

[aaron.kempf]

no. Microsoft says that a _DATABASE_ will grow to 2gb.

a _TABLE_ will grow to 1gb.

Either way-- anything over _TEN_ megabytes should move to SQL Server.

I don't mean to be a jerk.. I just have to use big words to stand up
to continual attacks in this group.

I love _ACCESS_ more than anything. I use 'Access Data Projects'.
I think that the idea of using a MDB for 1gb of data-- is pretty much
the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

It is _IMPOSSIBLE_ for you to ever determine whether you are properly
indexed.

I have a HANDFUL of ways to analyze indexes with SQL Server.
A 1gb database that is not properly indexes-- is going to give you
trouble.

And there are _ZERO_ Access people in this newsgroups that can
optimally index a table -- the best way-- the right way-- the first
time.

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

and Microsoft has been reccomending large datasets to move to SQL
Server for more than a decade

1gb in Access is 'unusable' without SQL Server or some other service
based database.

you can use mySql if you want.. but you're still going to have an
inefficient piece of crap front end.

Use the upsizing wizard and MSDE 2.0 in order to upsize the db; fix
the rest of the queries.
ANd then go and take a class on SQL Server.

It's worth it-- if you have 1gb of data.

Just like Excel-- now it will support 1m records.

Is it _PRACTICAL_ to have 20 people entering data into a spreadsheet
all the time?

Just because it PHYSICALLY FITS 1m rows in Excel-- does that make it
the best platform?

Just because you can PHYSICALLY FIT 1gb of data in Access- it doesn't
mean that you _SHOULD_.

And listening to people in here- about what to do with a 1gb Access
database-- is like asking crack addicts how to get off of crack.

-Aaron

 

[Gina Whipp]

JmillerWV

I usually put...

DoCmd.GoToRecord , , acPrevious

....after the delete 'lines' in the code window.

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

no. Microsoft says that a _DATABASE_ will grow to 2gb.

a _TABLE_ will grow to 1gb.

Wrong. A table in an Access MDB can grow to the full 2 gb.

Either way-- anything over _TEN_ megabytes should move to SQL Server.

Rubbish.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Use the upsizing wizard and MSDE 2.0 in order to upsize the db; fix
the rest of the queries.

SSMA would likely be a better solution.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/solutions/migration/default.mspx
However it only supports SQL Server 2005.

ANd then go and take a class on SQL Server.
It's worth it-- if you have 1gb of data.

Actually Aaron's right on that comment. I'd say even if you're getting into the
500 Mb range it's worth looking at putting your data in SQL Server.

However ADPs have not been enhanced in A2007 and are, in my opinion, unlikely to see
any enhancements in the future.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

 

[aaron.kempf]

Wow, Tony.. I really hadn't noticed that.

http://www.databasedev.co.uk/access_specifications.html

Thanks-- I learn something new every day..


-Aaron

 

[jmillerWV]

Aaron,
Thank you for the reply and i must apologize for having gone off on your
remark using the word stupid. That is a word that I had told to me all my
life and it just bothers me. I hope you will accept my apology. After reading
the other comments you and Tony wrote I can see why you recommend going to
SQL. I will move the database to SQL as soon as I can learn enough about it
to get it running. As far as taking a class on SQL I am checking with the
local schools to see if they offer any SQL classes. Are you aware of any self
ed courses either on line or not?

Again thank you for your reply and I do apologize for having spouted off.
You people do a great service to the computer community and we all thank you.

 

[jmillerWV]

Tony,
thank you for your reply. I appreciate all the help you folks give. One
question do you know of any self ed courses on SQL, not sure if our local
schools offer it.

Again thank you for your reply and help. You folks do a great service.

 

[aaron.kempf]

I purchased a subscription from www.quickcert.com a year ago.. To
reward myself for my MCDBA..

Probably the best $700/year I could possibly imagine.

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

And for the record-- sometimes the development of Microsoft Access has
not taken a linear approach.

Access MDB wasn't fixed for three versions-- 2000, 2002, and 2003.

Then what? Bring a dead platform and a dead DAL back to life?

I don't think that it is fair of you to say 'oh it didn't get any
fixes (other than all the fixes that MDB got, _AND_ support for SQL
2005) and thus it's going away.

That is called FUD.

I don't think that there is anyone in the world that could have
forecasted that Microsoft backtracked on the DAO thign.

But the fact of the matter-- is that ADO is STILL the better library--
what if you want to move to mySql?
What if you want to move to Olap?

What if you want to move to Oracle? What if you want to move to DB2?

If you've used DAO then you are shit out of luck.

With ADO; you are free to use any connection that you want.

That is the single reason that DAO sucks balls.

The punchline is this-- We can't let Microsoft _DICTATE_ to us what
direction they take this.
Because they have proven that they are incapable of telling a
consistent story.

I think that Microsofts move back to DAO-- was merely a ploy to move
people to ADO.net.

It's called 'divide and conquer' and Microsoft has been doing it great
for a year.

Just because some retard in a wheelchair-- doesn't have the mental
capacity to learn SQL Server-- does that mean that we all should run
around in a wheelchair and use a retards' database?

I don't mean to be negative.

I just urge everyone to resist the 'groupthink' in this channel.

I'm the only one here that _EARNED_ my cert. Everyone else got it
because they know how to use the 'linked table manager'.

I find it hilarious.

A bunch of midgets; dancing around a fire, drinkign and praising the
retard-midget god.

And I come along-- and it's like Gullivers travels-- everyone attacks
me because I'm better, stronger, faster, more scalable, more reliable.

I've said it 100 times.

But I move more data before breakfast than everyone else on this
newsgroup, have their whole career combined.

The answer is 'build what you want 5 years from now, not what was most
popular 15 years ago'.

-Aaron