Access 2007 bug with SQL Server Back End
in [Help]
|
From: AVG on 23 Jun 2010 08:44 Tony, It was a good suggestion. I learned some things (and hope others did also). And, I certainly appreciate all the effort and feedback from Banana and David. BTW, I just got a message from the Microsoft tech that is handling the case - "I wanted to let you know we do have a bug report based on the information you provided. Right now I do not have any good estimates on when this might be fixed." Don't know if that means they will 'at some point' fix it, or just that it is now 'officially' a bug. -- AG Email: npATadhdataDOTcom "Tony Toews" <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:h963261blimhpeps64vl18g35go2urh8at(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 16:41:53 -0400, "AVG" > <NOSPAMagiamb(a)newsgroup.nospam> wrote: > >>I am posting this at the suggestion of Tony Toews in response to another >>of >>my posts. > > Wow. has my suggestion ever spawned an interesting thread. I'll take > complete credit. <smile> > > Tony
From: Tony Toews on 23 Jun 2010 18:36 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 08:44:44 -0400, "AVG" <NOSPAMagiamb(a)newsgroup.nospam> wrote: >BTW, I just got a message from the Microsoft tech that is handling the >case - > >"I wanted to let you know we do have a bug report based on the information >you provided. Right now I do not have any good estimates on when this might >be fixed." > >Don't know if that means they will 'at some point' fix it, or just that it >is now 'officially' a bug. Hard to say. I assume MS fixes bugs which affect more people. I hate to say it but if you're the only person reporting this problem well ..... Tony
From: Banana on 23 Jun 2010 19:42 On 6/23/10 3:36 PM, Tony Toews wrote: > Hard to say. I assume MS fixes bugs which affect more people. I hate > to say it but if you're the only person reporting this problem well > .... > > Tony Considering that I've reproduced this against two different backends, and I personally have had run afoul of #Deleted few times but worked around it in past (to be fair - I can't say if they were same as AVG has pinpointed and it's too long ago for me to remember the exact circumstances but suffice to say it does happen frequently enough to be an irritation), I'm going to be very, very irate if they didn't think it important. Besides they did ask about improving SQL Server integration for next version of Access few months ago. I'd think that'd be a good case to make. I intend to report this because well, #Deleted just isn't right! I do sincerely hope others will likewise report this bug so Access will be able to fully support different objects (in this cases, views and triggers). As was discussed in another branch - ODBC and OLEDB are evolving. Time for Access to keep up.
From: Tony Toews on 23 Jun 2010 20:09 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 16:42:31 -0700, Banana <Banana(a)Republic.com> wrote: >Considering that I've reproduced this against two different backends, >and I personally have had run afoul of #Deleted few times but worked >around it in past (to be fair - I can't say if they were same as AVG has >pinpointed and it's too long ago for me to remember the exact >circumstances but suffice to say it does happen frequently enough to be >an irritation), I'm going to be very, very irate if they didn't think it >important. Besides they did ask about improving SQL Server integration >for next version of Access few months ago. I'd think that'd be a good >case to make. > >I intend to report this because well, #Deleted just isn't right! I do >sincerely hope others will likewise report this bug so Access will be >able to fully support different objects (in this cases, views and >triggers). As was discussed in another branch - ODBC and OLEDB are >evolving. Time for Access to keep up. If you report it and others do then I would assume the chances of it getting fixed get better and better. Especially if you can give MS clear step by step instructions and a small sample database. Tony
From: AVG on 24 Jun 2010 10:15
Yes, it would be good if Microsoft had more reports of the problem. Perhaps they would fix it faster (assuming they intend to fix it). I have already sent them a database and Access file, but, the more the merrier :). Even in their own technical article, they recommend using views with instead of triggers. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb188204.aspx FWIW, I was just working in Access 2003 and was curious if the problem existed there also. So I saved my sample 2007 db as 2003 and tried it. The problem did exist with 2003. -- AG Email: npATadhdataDOTcom "Tony Toews" <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:8g8526993026dlkl4ikfhqhtuchu7dr6cr(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 16:42:31 -0700, Banana <Banana(a)Republic.com> > wrote: > >>Considering that I've reproduced this against two different backends, >>and I personally have had run afoul of #Deleted few times but worked >>around it in past (to be fair - I can't say if they were same as AVG has >>pinpointed and it's too long ago for me to remember the exact >>circumstances but suffice to say it does happen frequently enough to be >>an irritation), I'm going to be very, very irate if they didn't think it >>important. Besides they did ask about improving SQL Server integration >>for next version of Access few months ago. I'd think that'd be a good >>case to make. >> >>I intend to report this because well, #Deleted just isn't right! I do >>sincerely hope others will likewise report this bug so Access will be >>able to fully support different objects (in this cases, views and >>triggers). As was discussed in another branch - ODBC and OLEDB are >>evolving. Time for Access to keep up. > > If you report it and others do then I would assume the chances of it > getting fixed get better and better. Especially if you can give MS > clear step by step instructions and a small sample database. > > Tony |