|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
December 2nd, 2009, 01:45 AM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL 2005
We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form
that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. 
|
|
#2
December 2nd, 2009, 01:52 AM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL 2005
"Sean" wrote in message
... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup)
|
|
#3
December 2nd, 2009, 01:52 AM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL 2005
"Sean" wrote in message
... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup)
|
|
#4
December 2nd, 2009, 01:52 AM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL 2005
"Sean" wrote in message
... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup)
|
|
#5
December 2nd, 2009, 05:33 PM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL
"Dirk Goldgar" wrote: "Sean" wrote in message ... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup) Yes the records are updatable. Some of the tables do not have a timestamp/autonumber on them. I will update those fields and reply back. Thanks. sean.
|
|
#6
December 2nd, 2009, 05:33 PM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL
"Dirk Goldgar" wrote: "Sean" wrote in message ... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup) Yes the records are updatable. Some of the tables do not have a timestamp/autonumber on them. I will update those fields and reply back. Thanks. sean.
|
|
#7
December 2nd, 2009, 05:33 PM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL
"Dirk Goldgar" wrote: "Sean" wrote in message ... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup) Yes the records are updatable. Some of the tables do not have a timestamp/autonumber on them. I will update those fields and reply back. Thanks. sean.
|
|
#8
December 2nd, 2009, 09:42 PM
posted to microsoft.public.access.forms
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subforms on main form not displaying after Access 2007 to SQL
"Dirk Goldgar" wrote: "Sean" wrote in message ... We migrated an Access Database to SQL for various reasons. I now have a form that has multiple sub forms on it, where when I use the version of the access applicaiton that is linked to the SQL, the subforms do not appear if there is no data in the rows selected. However, if I use the Access only application, then the subforms appear and are able to be manipulated and edited. We have not changed any of the code or controls in the access application. The only thing we did was to move the data from access to SQL. Any pointers would be appreciated. In the cases where there *are* records for the subforms to display, are those records updatable? My guess is that the linked SQL tables aren't updatable. Do they have timestamp/rowversion fields? It's been a while since I last upsized to SQL Server, but IIRC it is recommended to add a timestamp field to tables to ensure updatability from Access. -- Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP Access tips: www.datagnostics.com/tips.html (please reply to the newsgroup) Okay, that was successful with one of the two subforms that I am having issues with. The other one is still no joy.
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
