Access 2007 with Vista
in [General]
|
Prev: qualquer
Next: check report is open
From: royfarnol on 26 May 2010 02:02 Because of a power surge I lost one of my database records. Is there anyway I can restore the missing auto number? I would like to do so in order that several other database numbers remain synchronised. Thanks, Roy.
From: Jon Lewis on 26 May 2010 08:13 This is a bad idea. There are a number of reasons why auto numbers may not be contiguous and for that reason it's not advisable to use them for this purpose. You can try to generate your own sequential series of numbers but even that probably wouldn't be completely fool proof. Post details of the synchronisation you need as there's probably another solution. HTH Jon "royfarnol" <royfarnol(a)kol.co.nz> wrote in message news:OOOe9jJ$KHA.5560(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Because of a power surge I lost one of my database records. > > Is there anyway I can restore the missing auto number? > > I would like to do so in order that several other database numbers remain > synchronised. > > Thanks, Roy.
From: royfarnol on 26 May 2010 21:29 It probably is a bad idea but it has been done and it involves other people's databases. The Access program I run produces an item number, by way of the autonumber function, which is then notified to several other people as a master item number. After that each procesesses the information in their own way. When results (or sometimes lack of results) are finalised (or exhuasted) the report comes back under the master number. I would rather not have to begin again as it were but reintroduce the number that was obliterated by the power surge. I know one could issue a number of one's own but human error then creeps in, which is why the autonumber function was picked in the first place. But maybe you have a better idea or a workaround solution? Thanks, Roy. "Jon Lewis" <jon.lewis(a)cutthespambtinternet.com> wrote in message news:ebA4VzM$KHA.980(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > This is a bad idea. There are a number of reasons why auto numbers may > not be contiguous and for that reason it's not advisable to use them for > this purpose. You can try to generate your own sequential series of > numbers but even that probably wouldn't be completely fool proof. > > Post details of the synchronisation you need as there's probably another > solution. > > HTH > > Jon > > > > > > "royfarnol" <royfarnol(a)kol.co.nz> wrote in message > news:OOOe9jJ$KHA.5560(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> Because of a power surge I lost one of my database records. >> >> Is there anyway I can restore the missing auto number? >> >> I would like to do so in order that several other database numbers remain >> synchronised. >> >> Thanks, Roy. > >
From: KenSheridan via AccessMonster.com on 27 May 2010 12:02 You can insert a row into the table, with a specific value for the autonumber column by means of an 'append' query, e.g. INSERT INTO [YourTable] ([ItemNumber], [ItemText]) VALUES(42, "Widget"); But relying on an auto number to give an uninterrupted sequence is very risky. Its far better to automatically compute the number when a row is inserted. Roger Carlson has simple solutions, for both single-user and multi-user environments at: http://www.rogersaccesslibrary.com/forum/topic395.html and there is a more complex one of mine for use in a multi-user environment, which also allows for the next number to be used to be 'seeded' at: http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=libraryMessages&tsn=1&tid=23839&webtag=ws-msdevapps Ken Sheridan Stafford, England royfarnol wrote: >It probably is a bad idea but it has been done and it involves other >people's databases. > >The Access program I run produces an item number, by way of the autonumber >function, which is then notified to several other people as a master item >number. After that each procesesses the information in their own way. When >results (or sometimes lack of results) are finalised (or exhuasted) the >report comes back under the master number. > >I would rather not have to begin again as it were but reintroduce the number >that was obliterated by the power surge. I know one could issue a number of >one's own but human error then creeps in, which is why the autonumber >function was picked in the first place. > >But maybe you have a better idea or a workaround solution? > >Thanks, Roy. > >> This is a bad idea. There are a number of reasons why auto numbers may >> not be contiguous and for that reason it's not advisable to use them for >[quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>> >>> Thanks, Roy. -- Message posted via AccessMonster.com http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/access/201005/1
From: royfarnol on 28 May 2010 01:49
Thankyou Mr. Sherdian. I'll look into those links you gave for a better way. "KenSheridan via AccessMonster.com" <u51882(a)uwe> wrote in message news:a8a302da457c1(a)uwe... > You can insert a row into the table, with a specific value for the > autonumber > column by means of an 'append' query, e.g. > > INSERT INTO [YourTable] ([ItemNumber], [ItemText]) > VALUES(42, "Widget"); > > But relying on an auto number to give an uninterrupted sequence is very > risky. > Its far better to automatically compute the number when a row is inserted. > Roger Carlson has simple solutions, for both single-user and multi-user > environments at: > > http://www.rogersaccesslibrary.com/forum/topic395.html > > and there is a more complex one of mine for use in a multi-user > environment, > which also allows for the next number to be used to be 'seeded' at: > > http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=libraryMessages&tsn=1&tid=23839&webtag=ws-msdevapps > > > Ken Sheridan > Stafford, England > > royfarnol wrote: >>It probably is a bad idea but it has been done and it involves other >>people's databases. >> >>The Access program I run produces an item number, by way of the autonumber >>function, which is then notified to several other people as a master item >>number. After that each procesesses the information in their own way. When >>results (or sometimes lack of results) are finalised (or exhuasted) the >>report comes back under the master number. >> >>I would rather not have to begin again as it were but reintroduce the >>number >>that was obliterated by the power surge. I know one could issue a number >>of >>one's own but human error then creeps in, which is why the autonumber >>function was picked in the first place. >> >>But maybe you have a better idea or a workaround solution? >> >>Thanks, Roy. >> >>> This is a bad idea. There are a number of reasons why auto numbers may >>> not be contiguous and for that reason it's not advisable to use them for >>[quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>>> >>>> Thanks, Roy. > > -- > Message posted via AccessMonster.com > http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/access/201005/1 > |