midfde
asked on
Access warns about 85 of 0 (zero) rows to be deleted.What is it?
Dear experts. Please help me with understanding the attached image. What 85 rows in an empty table is MS Access talking about?
Just to draw your attention, my question begins with "what?", not with "Why?" or "How to?"
My actions: put pointer inside the procedure, press F5, stare at the message box, press <ctrl + PrScr>, type "Experts-Exchange.com" where it belongs.
Thanks.
Just to draw your attention, my question begins with "what?", not with "Why?" or "How to?"
My actions: put pointer inside the procedure, press F5, stare at the message box, press <ctrl + PrScr>, type "Experts-Exchange.com" where it belongs.
Thanks.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
On the Dcount, I meant.
Is 'Anomoly Entries' a local Access table or a linked table? If it is a linked table, what is the backend database?
ASKER
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Dumb question; have you actually looked at the table? If it's empty, then I would strongly suspect DB corruption.
Jim.
Jim.
<<After "Compact and Repair" of the backend "RealData.mdb" the problem is gone...
MS Access is freaky sometimes. The answer to "What" in my original question does not make sense any more... "Who knows..">>
Count(*) is highly optimized and runs off of indexes if it can. Sounds like you had an index hangin out there and not actualy records to back it up.
I would not rely on the compact and repair alone ( a good C&R does not mean your free from corruption).
Create a fresh DB container and import everything into it.
Jim.
MS Access is freaky sometimes. The answer to "What" in my original question does not make sense any more... "Who knows..">>
Count(*) is highly optimized and runs off of indexes if it can. Sounds like you had an index hangin out there and not actualy records to back it up.
I would not rely on the compact and repair alone ( a good C&R does not mean your free from corruption).
Create a fresh DB container and import everything into it.
Jim.
ASKER
Do "Dumb questions" exist? It's moot. Do Dumb answers exist? Sure they do.
ASKER
If try to be polite, we call a function that returns not what it is supposed to, "highly optimized", meaning... pardon my French.
<<If try to be polite, we call a function that returns not what it is supposed to, "highly optimized", meaning... pardon my French. >>
Any DBMS when dealing with a corrupted DB can/will return inaccurate results.
If it returns inaccurate results on a good DB, then obviosuly it's a bug and your thoughts would apply.
It's clear though this was not a good DB in that after a C&R the operation was correct, so you did have some corruption.
Whether you blame JET, the number of times you do a Ctrl/Alt/Del, the OS, hardware, or the stray cosmic ray would be open to conjecture.
Jim.
Any DBMS when dealing with a corrupted DB can/will return inaccurate results.
If it returns inaccurate results on a good DB, then obviosuly it's a bug and your thoughts would apply.
It's clear though this was not a good DB in that after a C&R the operation was correct, so you did have some corruption.
Whether you blame JET, the number of times you do a Ctrl/Alt/Del, the OS, hardware, or the stray cosmic ray would be open to conjecture.
Jim.
ASKER
A software component must work. Or fail. But never lie. Ask Curiosity developers for instance.
<<A software component must work. Or fail. But never lie. Ask Curiosity developers for instance. >>
Boy you must have not worked in software long! Your in for an eye opener<g>
Software doesn't lie; it can only go by what it is told and what it knows to do.
GIGO.
Jim.
Boy you must have not worked in software long! Your in for an eye opener<g>
Software doesn't lie; it can only go by what it is told and what it knows to do.
GIGO.
Jim.
All software is beta.
ASKER
This is true but it is not the whole truth.
A program outputs what a programmers (more or less skilled) tells it to. However when a piece of software tells you it found 85 rows, while the table is empty, it's a lie from user's perspective who apparently does not care what and how ordered a program to do so. It's certainly a bug from developer's perspective no matter whether someone told the user "It's your fault. It was you who did not press <ctrl + S>. Right?"
Thanks, Jim for non-trivial discussion.
More to the point though, what did you mean by "import everything into it." Did it include things like application properties? Relationships? Input-output specs? Just curious. I might open a new question if you want.
A program outputs what a programmers (more or less skilled) tells it to. However when a piece of software tells you it found 85 rows, while the table is empty, it's a lie from user's perspective who apparently does not care what and how ordered a program to do so. It's certainly a bug from developer's perspective no matter whether someone told the user "It's your fault. It was you who did not press <ctrl + S>. Right?"
Thanks, Jim for non-trivial discussion.
More to the point though, what did you mean by "import everything into it." Did it include things like application properties? Relationships? Input-output specs? Just curious. I might open a new question if you want.
ASKER
>>All software is beta.
Wonderful. Thanks jerryb30!
Wonderful. Thanks jerryb30!
<<More to the point though, what did you mean by "import everything into it." Did it include things like application properties? Relationships? Input-output specs? Just curious. I might open a new question if you want. >>
Application properties you'd need to re-create, but everything else will come over. just make sure you use the "options" button in the import dialog. This gives you additional options on importing things, like import/export specs, relationships, etc.
Surprised you'd be using application properties; not many do.
Jim.
Application properties you'd need to re-create, but everything else will come over. just make sure you use the "options" button in the import dialog. This gives you additional options on importing things, like import/export specs, relationships, etc.
Surprised you'd be using application properties; not many do.
Jim.
ASKER
Sorry, I meant Database properties like:
?CurrentDb.Properties("AppTitle")
Real Data v004
More precisely I meant "Is there a way to tell Access: "Import everything". It is not a problem for me while I am with VSS, but I am not sure how it'll go with looming TFS though.
<<Sorry, I meant Database properties like:>>
Yes, that's what I thought you meant and no, they don't import. You need to recreate them.
Probably why many don't use them.
Jim.
Yes, that's what I thought you meant and no, they don't import. You need to recreate them.
Probably why many don't use them.
Jim.
ASKER
Happy Holidays to all!
Relationships? Input-output specs? Just curious
Just a side comment:
I no longer use Import/Export specs. They can be quirky and easily lost by someone who doesn't know that it is an additional import check box. I just build VBA routines to do it.
ASKER
>>I no longer use Import/Export specs
Good point, but, again, my question was about "Import everything" capability without error-prone "re-create" manually operation. I usually restore database by means of "Create from SourceSafe" menu item. BTW the Microsoft Access backend database in question was developed at least a decade ago.
Good point, but, again, my question was about "Import everything" capability without error-prone "re-create" manually operation. I usually restore database by means of "Create from SourceSafe" menu item. BTW the Microsoft Access backend database in question was developed at least a decade ago.
Not a problem. I was just pointing it out. You should be able to go from SourceSafe and then just import the pertinent data tables.
ASKER
An "undocumented feature".
ASKER
Open in new window