Parsing a table

[looking]

I have a database with about 20k records, 2k of which I want to be in
a like structured but seperate table. I have a number field that
identifies the ones I want to parse. In words I want to run a query
that makes two tables from one based on criteria.

I'm wondering about method. The best I can think of is to copy the
table, run a delete query in each.

Am I on the right track?

 

[Arvin Meyer]

I have a database with about 20k records, 2k of which I want to be in
a like structured but seperate table. I have a number field that
identifies the ones I want to parse. In words I want to run a query
that makes two tables from one based on criteria.

I'm wondering about method. The best I can think of is to copy the
table, run a delete query in each.

Am I on the right track?

There are other methodes but since you are doing it only once, your method
is as good as any.

I have to wonder why though. Having 2 identical table structure is not good
design and is definitely in conflict with Normalization rules. It would be
correct, to simply add a field that identifies which records are which.

--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.accessmvp.com
http://access.mvps.org
Co-author: "Access Solutions", published by Wiley

 

[looking]

There are other methodes but since you are doing it only once, your method
is as good as any.

I have to wonder why though. Having 2 identical table structure is not good
design and is definitely in conflict with Normalization rules. It would be
correct, to simply add a field that identifies which records are which.

The reason is not to maintain two like tables in the same db but to
eventually/FINALLY split the content into two different ones so they
both can be improved but in different directions.

I understand the importance of normalization though I didn't when I
began this project in excel. Parts of it are still maintained there
and I know it can be much better integrated. The records that are
being removed were added with an identifying field.

Thanks for the prompt reply!