ODBC timeout - update on linked tables - SQL Server 2000 - Microsof Access 2003

Microsoft Access 2003 MDB - DSN Less connection to SQL Server 2000

I have 2 databases operating this way.  1 with no issues.  The 2nd is generating an update on linked table failed - ODBC timeout expired.  I have check the table but can find nothing that seems to be different.  The form is a basic main form with subforms using the same record source.  When I change a value on the subform and then move to the parent form the hourglass appears and then the timeout eventually appears.  This same operation on the identical form in the 1st database has no problems.

Any ideas?
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.


good night
¿the 1st database is in other server?
Go to Tools --> Options --> Advanced  and increase the OLE/DDE TimeOut. See if that works.
Set a commandtimeout value on your connection object...

dim cnn as Connection
etc., etc.

cnn.commandtimeout = 180   '* in seconds
Determine the Perfect Price for Your IT Services

Do you wonder if your IT business is truly profitable or if you should raise your prices? Learn how to calculate your overhead burden with our free interactive tool and use it to determine the right price for your IT services. Download your free eBook now!

softdimensionsAuthor Commented:
the 2 databases are identical instruture i.e. they contain different data but the structure is presumably the same.  Is there something in the data that could cause this.  Even if it worked after increasing the timeout it would be unacceptably slow
It sounds like  a locking issue -- here's some random thoughts...

Why are you using separate forms (main & sub) if the data source is the same?  Are you using separate recordset objects (one for the main and one for the sub)against the recordsource?

I'm wondering if the "main" form is holding a row (or page) lock on your data, so when the subform tries to update data it's timing out waiting for the main form to relinquish the lock.

Of course, if the forms and code are EXACT duplicates that shouldn't be happening on the client/Access end of one but not the other (check your recordset.open parameters).

Is the data locking set differently on the two databases (pessimistic vs. optomistic; row vs. page, etc)?  My dim recollection from when I was a heavy -duty SQL Server type was that the default configuration for SQL Server 2000 was page locking (locks a lot of rows), although it could be changed to row-level.  I also think this can be set at the table level.

Good luck,

Jerry N
Additional thought (shifting to SQL mode!)...

Try running the UPDATE code directly on the server via the SQL Query Analyzer.  If it's bad data or something about the table design, it should fail there, also.  Only with better error messages.

In the ODBC world, I also used the SQL Trace tool, where you could view the actual text streams of code going back and forth between the client and server -- don't know if that's available for the DNS less connections, but would be worth a look.


Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
excuse me ,
¿is the first database in w2k server and the second in w2k3 server?
softdimensionsAuthor Commented:
Both databases are on the same server and should have the same code, although the problem most probably lies in the main for sub form relationships being slightly different between versions.  I will try some of genaughton suggestions this weekend / Monday and see what happens
softdimensionsAuthor Commented:
It was "bad" data - but not really bad data but a corrupt index so genaughton: gets the points since he was closest.  I removed the indexes for the table in questions and recreated them and now both databases operate the same

It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft Access

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.