DAO.Database error 3492 when attempting to sync replica to design master

We currently use DAO 3.6 with Access 2003.

To update cleint databases, we create templates from the design master and distribute those templates.

For some clients, we get this error:

3492 - The synchronization failed because a design change could not be applied to one of the replicas.

the line that causes this error is: db.Synchronize sTemplate, dbRepImportChanges

I check the MSysSchemaProb table and found this information
Column = Value
Command = Set
Error = 3011
ErrorText = The Microsoft Jet database engine could not find the object 'qryCityByCityStateCode'.  Make sure the object exists and that you spell its name and the path name correctly.
SchemaVersion = 10833
Text1 = Tables
Text2 = qryCBCSC

I checked the upgrade template and the query is there, i have tried rebuild the database into a blank version of the same db with no luck, i ran code to see if there are any conflicts listed and there are not. please help. Thank you.
Who is Participating?
DevLSSConnect With a Mentor Author Commented:
none of these replicas could have had the query, because it was added to the design master this time. so when the template is applied to the replicas, the query is being created.

I also checked the upgrade template against the design master and the query is identical in every way.

I can try rebuilding the database into a newer version of the database(which i prefer to find a solution and not use this workaround). That will usually do the trick.
Often Access error messages are cryptic.  Even though the query exists, there may have been a design change within the query itself that is causing the error with the upgrade template.   Try comparing the query in design view or in sql view between the upgrade template  and Design master.  

Hope this helps.
DevLSSAuthor Commented:
i did compare them and they are identical, the same exact SQL and design view
Free Tool: SSL Checker

Scans your site and returns information about your SSL implementation and certificate. Helpful for debugging and validating your SSL configuration.

One of a set of tools we are providing to everyone as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

hmmm....just thinking....I know you said the query was exactly the same in sql and in design view....but would you have noticed if the order of the columns in the query grid or query sql was slightly different?  It seems to me that if the select statement was changed from >>>>>Select A, B, C  to >>> Select A,C, B  this might a subtle change between the design master and the upgrade template that you might have overlooked.  And it could also explain why the error goes away when you rebuild the db..
DevLSSAuthor Commented:
i could see that as a problem, but why would it work for one DB and not another?
I  assume that the replicas were created at different times, and all but one created after the design change to the query was made in the master...... the one replica that was created before the design change is the one that caused the conflict........which went away when you created a new replica.  Is that possible??
DevLSSAuthor Commented:
Yes, the replicas were created at different times, but i don't see how that would be the problem because aren't all the replicas tied to the deisgn change history of the design master?
Yes, that is what the synchronization process is all about. .....if a design change is made to the master, it won't present itself as a conflict until the next attempt to synchronize....at which time the conflict will be resolved and disappear (as in your case). Timing does matter.

Your last question was related to how it was possible that only the one replica was showing  a conflict....and the answer is that the one replica was created from the master as it existed before the design change to the query was made.  The other replicas did not have the conflict because they were probably created after the design change was made, and therefore, those replicas had already included the  design change before the synchronization that is the subject of this post was performed.
Ok,then I have no other ideas as to why only one of your replicas had the conflict.  If it doesn't happen very often, your workaround should suffice.
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.