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
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm
experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
Christine
I'm not sure I understand. In a well-normalized data design, the table/tables would only rarely be changing. New data and changes to existing records, sure, but table design changes? Could you describe how you're finding it necessary to change your table design? There may an alternate design to could reduce/eliminate the changes. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
I add and remove fields and rename them all the time. I guess I'm not normal?
"Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine I'm not sure I understand. In a well-normalized data design, the table/tables would only rarely be changing. New data and changes to existing records, sure, but table design changes? Could you describe how you're finding it necessary to change your table design? There may an alternate design to could reduce/eliminate the changes. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
I think you are normal (BG) but the Table is probably not normalised.
Most databases I look after have a lot more than one Table. The database I am designing at present has more than 100 Tables. See Jeff Conrad's references on Database Design 101 section: http://home.bendbroadband.com/conrad.../resources.htm -- HTH Van T. Dinh MVP (Access) "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I add and remove fields and rename them all the time. I guess I'm not normal? "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine I'm not sure I understand. In a well-normalized data design, the table/tables would only rarely be changing. New data and changes to existing records, sure, but table design changes? Could you describe how you're finding it necessary to change your table design? There may an alternate design to could reduce/eliminate the changes. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
Christine
Why be normal?! But I'm still curious -- you explained THAT you do this... but I still don't know WHY? What business need are you trying to solve by doing this? Again, I ask because there may be other ways to accomplish what you need done, without doing it the way you've discovered so far... Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I add and remove fields and rename them all the time. I guess I'm not normal? "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine I'm not sure I understand. In a well-normalized data design, the table/tables would only rarely be changing. New data and changes to existing records, sure, but table design changes? Could you describe how you're finding it necessary to change your table design? There may an alternate design to could reduce/eliminate the changes. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
I read the info that Van sent about normalizing a database. As far as I can
see, I'm normal (smile)! My databases (2) have no "like" fields. These are personal databases I use for my collection of casino chips and gift cards. The main fields are "Casino Name" or "Store Name," "Description," and "Qty" "Location," and I have a record number field as my primary key field. The rest of the fields are mostly Yes/No fields (check boxes) or drop down fields. I trade with other people and use queries for things like printing lists of the chips/cards I have for trade (where QYT 1), queries for all my Vegas chips, queries for cards from certain stores, etc. Sometimes I will eliminate the QTY field from a query because I don't want to display this information when printing lists. Then my filter/sort criteria gets all messed up. If there's a better way, please share, but I don't know any other way to do this. My question was fairly simple - so I thought. I don't understand why, when you eliminate a field from a query or rename a field (for whatever reason) why you lose your filter/sort criteria. I want to be able to "normalize" my filter/sort criteria for my entire database. If you can help, I appreciate it. Thanks. Christine "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine Why be normal?! But I'm still curious -- you explained THAT you do this... but I still don't know WHY? What business need are you trying to solve by doing this? Again, I ask because there may be other ways to accomplish what you need done, without doing it the way you've discovered so far... Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I add and remove fields and rename them all the time. I guess I'm not normal? "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine I'm not sure I understand. In a well-normalized data design, the table/tables would only rarely be changing. New data and changes to existing records, sure, but table design changes? Could you describe how you're finding it necessary to change your table design? There may an alternate design to could reduce/eliminate the changes. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Filter Sort Annoyance
Christine
My original concern (and still active concern) was your assertion that you are changing your table definitions. Tables store your data. Are you saying that the data structure (not the values) change frequently? From your description, you have the same structure, with different values from time to time. It may be that you table structure would benefit from further normalization, even if you already consider it normalized. Queries retrieve sets of data. If your selection criteria change, you can use the same query and modify it by changing the selection criterion. If this happens often, you can use a parameter query to prompt for the selection criterion. If this happens very frequently, you can create a form on which you select values and revise your query to look to the form's values for criteria. If you wish to select by a field, but not display it, create a report based on the query, and simply leave out the (don't show this) field from the report definition. If your data structure has a number of "mostly Yes/No" fields in a table, I'll suggest that further normalization may be needed. If you provide the newsgroup more specifics about your current data structure, readers may be able to offer more specific alternate approaches. Good luck! Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I read the info that Van sent about normalizing a database. As far as I can see, I'm normal (smile)! My databases (2) have no "like" fields. These are personal databases I use for my collection of casino chips and gift cards. The main fields are "Casino Name" or "Store Name," "Description," and "Qty" "Location," and I have a record number field as my primary key field. The rest of the fields are mostly Yes/No fields (check boxes) or drop down fields. I trade with other people and use queries for things like printing lists of the chips/cards I have for trade (where QYT 1), queries for all my Vegas chips, queries for cards from certain stores, etc. Sometimes I will eliminate the QTY field from a query because I don't want to display this information when printing lists. Then my filter/sort criteria gets all messed up. If there's a better way, please share, but I don't know any other way to do this. My question was fairly simple - so I thought. I don't understand why, when you eliminate a field from a query or rename a field (for whatever reason) why you lose your filter/sort criteria. I want to be able to "normalize" my filter/sort criteria for my entire database. If you can help, I appreciate it. Thanks. Christine "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine Why be normal?! But I'm still curious -- you explained THAT you do this... but I still don't know WHY? What business need are you trying to solve by doing this? Again, I ask because there may be other ways to accomplish what you need done, without doing it the way you've discovered so far... Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I add and remove fields and rename them all the time. I guess I'm not normal? "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Christine I'm not sure I understand. In a well-normalized data design, the table/tables would only rarely be changing. New data and changes to existing records, sure, but table design changes? Could you describe how you're finding it necessary to change your table design? There may an alternate design to could reduce/eliminate the changes. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP "Christine Lisi" wrote in message ... I have a database w/ one table and many queries. The problem I'm experiencing is that whenever I change the design of the table in any way, I lose my filter/sort. Is there a way to set a permanent filter/sort to all tables/queries so that I don't have to redo it every time I make a design change? Thanks. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Date Filter - Access 2003 | Darhl Thomason | Using Forms | 10 | December 7th, 2005 12:35 AM |
Help with calculations in a query | RWhittet | Running & Setting Up Queries | 24 | November 28th, 2005 08:12 PM |
Toolbars, Drop-Down Menus | Rick | New Users | 1 | September 21st, 2005 11:17 AM |
Sort or Filter option? | Mcobra41 | Worksheet Functions | 3 | February 23rd, 2005 07:22 PM |
Filter - Advanced Filter? | carrera | New Users | 4 | August 13th, 2004 09:33 PM |