Bound Column in Combo Box

It shoud be fairly straight forward. You could use an unbound combo with a
union query that will include a list of each unique mnemonic:

SELECT DISTINCT mnemonic1 FROM DrugTable;
UNION SELECT DISTINCT mnemonic2 FROM DrugTable;

--
Dave Hargis, Microsoft Access MVP


"Carlgardner" wrote:

Yes that is correct. Both are in the same record. The PDM table is linked to
a current history table, but I didn't think that would matter to solve the
search problem. Searching by the mnemonic brings up all the people on that
drug and when it was started...

Carl

Klatuu wrote:
If I understand correctly, you want to find a drug using either mnemonic1 or
mnemonic2. How does that relate the the drug's record? Are the mnemonics
fields in the same record with the drug?
What then is the best solution? I have a query that among
other fields pulls 2 text fields that are mnemonics for a single item.
[quoted text clipped - 53 lines]
While ComboBoxes *can* be used for searching that is not what they are used
for the vast majority of the time.

I will try the union query again, but previously it kept coming back with a
syntax error but I don't think I used DISTINCT and I used ALL. Just to
reclarify, you cannot created an appended field within a query itself...only
in a table?

Klatuu wrote:
It shoud be fairly straight forward. You could use an unbound combo with a
union query that will include a list of each unique mnemonic:

SELECT DISTINCT mnemonic1 FROM DrugTable;
UNION SELECT DISTINCT mnemonic2 FROM DrugTable;

Yes that is correct. Both are in the same record. The PDM table is linked to
a current history table, but I didn't think that would matter to solve the
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
While ComboBoxes *can* be used for searching that is not what they are used
for the vast majority of the time.

what do you mean by "appended field"?
--
Dave Hargis, Microsoft Access MVP


"Carlgardner" wrote:

I will try the union query again, but previously it kept coming back with a
syntax error but I don't think I used DISTINCT and I used ALL. Just to
reclarify, you cannot created an appended field within a query itself...only
in a table?

Klatuu wrote:
It shoud be fairly straight forward. You could use an unbound combo with a
union query that will include a list of each unique mnemonic:

SELECT DISTINCT mnemonic1 FROM DrugTable;
UNION SELECT DISTINCT mnemonic2 FROM DrugTable;

Yes that is correct. Both are in the same record. The PDM table is linked to
a current history table, but I didn't think that would matter to solve the
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
While ComboBoxes *can* be used for searching that is not what they are used
for the vast majority of the time.

I suppose a new field of the union of the 2 mnemonic fields within the
original query so I could attach the form with the combo box in it. I was
worried that if I do get the UNION query to work, can I then attach the form
to mnemonic1 as before and still have it popup when the report starts?

Klatuu wrote:
what do you mean by "appended field"?
I will try the union query again, but previously it kept coming back with a
syntax error but I don't think I used DISTINCT and I used ALL. Just to
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
While ComboBoxes *can* be used for searching that is not what they are used
for the vast majority of the time.

Sorry, Carl, I am not understanding what you are asking.
--
Dave Hargis, Microsoft Access MVP


"Carlgardner" wrote:

I suppose a new field of the union of the 2 mnemonic fields within the
original query so I could attach the form with the combo box in it. I was
worried that if I do get the UNION query to work, can I then attach the form
to mnemonic1 as before and still have it popup when the report starts?

Klatuu wrote:
what do you mean by "appended field"?
I will try the union query again, but previously it kept coming back with a
syntax error but I don't think I used DISTINCT and I used ALL. Just to
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
While ComboBoxes *can* be used for searching that is not what they are used
for the vast majority of the time.

Thank you for your time...I will work on the union query

carl
Klatuu wrote:
Sorry, Carl, I am not understanding what you are asking.
I suppose a new field of the union of the 2 mnemonic fields within the
original query so I could attach the form with the combo box in it. I was
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
While ComboBoxes *can* be used for searching that is not what they are used
for the vast majority of the time.