Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sunshine Coast, Australia
    Posts
    52

    Unanswered: random number issue

    hi changed my database to allow for replication and it changed the autonumber to a random number. the problem is that when I add a new record that has a relationship with another record in another table it wont write.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    146
    Hi,

    If you wanted to make a replicated DB you have to do it first, not when your DB had already records in it.

    The replicas work with random n. in the primary key, to avoid to equal PK. (I think that's a knownsense, because when your DB had a large n. of records de odds of appear an equal record are too high, even with random numbers.)

    But on second thought, numbers are numbers, sequential or random, and when you replicate the DB, the relantionships must maintain.

    Even if you don't have relantionships made, but you have a form and a subform linked, the values are written in the related table.

    Check the relations, try to make a form and a subform and write values in there and see what happens.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    3,926

    Replication

    I've created databases which were Replicated and wasn't very happy about the tremendously large random number generated to avoid duplication in the replicated db's (i.e -223433433 to 234113433 for example.) Plus dealing with the synchranization process itself (if a user doesn't synchranize for a few months, it could cause problems). For myself, I prefer static ID's in the primary keys verses these large random numbers and like more of a solid referential integrity schematic.

    Instead of replicating the database, we utilize Citrix as a solution. Drawbacks are that the user needs to be connected via their T1/Lan, etc. and they can't enter records without being connected (i.e. they can't take the db on their laptop on the road, enter records, then get connected and synchranize back with the source db.), but who doesn't have some kind of connection (most companies do so they can go to websites.) Citrix does work very well and keeps the data in a central location (on our server) and everyone is working on the same data where as in the replication process, users were designing a lot of their own queries and making their own modifications, etc to the replicated db.

    You may want to look at Citrix as we've found it to be a very good alternative for users wanting to enter data to our server from other locations. Again, it's worked very well for us and the only problems we had to deal with were print driver issues when they wanted to print to their own printers. There are licensing fees though with Citrix. But it's also a fairly easy process to setup.
    Expert Database Programming
    MSAccess since 1.0, SQL Server since 6.5, Visual Basic (5.0, 6.0)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sunshine Coast, Australia
    Posts
    52
    the form that causes the issue has a sub form

    the main form is the primary record and the sub form is a record with additional data. could the problem be that the main record doesnt get written before the sub form record does?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •