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
|
|||
|
|||
Working with Jacked up table names & field names
(Please read the ENTIRE post)
I'm going to add some additional functionality to an existing database that has jacked up table & field names. There are only a handful, but given my time constraints I can't fix things now - like I should. From this point forward, I'd like to use naming conventions that make sense. Here's what I'm planning on doing... 1) My new objects will be in a separate MDB linked back to the existing database. Ultimately, it will be a traditionally split database design. 2) Instead of linking my forms and reports DIRECTLY to the linked queries, I'm going to create simple select queries that use expressions to convert the jacked up field names to a common naming convention. 3) Once the queries are ready, the new forms and reports will be based on them. Since the field names will technically be the same, all I'll have to do is change the record source to reflect the change in table names. In a sense, I'll be providing an alias of sorts for the jacked up names. The temporary queries will server as an intermediate layer of sorts. The total number of forms and reports in both databases will be VERY minimal, so we're not discussing anything major. Any ideas? Has anyone else tried this? Note: I've been working with Access for nearly 10 years now and have encountered a wide variety of situations (but have never had to try this) and I'm fully aware of the cavet and pitfalls of trying to change object names too deep into development. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Working with Jacked up table names & field names
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:31:00 -0700, dch3
wrote: Note: I've been working with Access for nearly 10 years now and have encountered a wide variety of situations (but have never had to try this) and I'm fully aware of the cavet and pitfalls of trying to change object names too deep into development. I don't see anything really wrong with your proposal, other than that you may take a performance hit by forcing JET to process two queries for every one you really want... But: have you considered making a copy of the database; turning on the much-maligned Name Autocorrect feature; opening each query in design view to force Access to perceive it; and then changing the fieldnames? At worst you will corrupt a spare copy of the database and waste a few minutes. At best you may fix your names. Do turn off Name Autocorrect when you're done of course! -- John W. Vinson [MVP] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Working with Jacked up table names & field names
I concur with John's remarks.
I would like to offer a suggestion. Below is a link to a really good Find and Replace utility that will allow you to fix all your bad names easily. I have used it extensively and find it very reliable. It will take very little time to correct all the bad names. It will actually save you time because you wont have to go back and make corrections at a later date. It is probably the best $39.00 US I have ever spent on software. It will change names in all your objects. http://www.rickworld.com/download.html -- Dave Hargis, Microsoft Access MVP "dch3" wrote: (Please read the ENTIRE post) I'm going to add some additional functionality to an existing database that has jacked up table & field names. There are only a handful, but given my time constraints I can't fix things now - like I should. From this point forward, I'd like to use naming conventions that make sense. Here's what I'm planning on doing... 1) My new objects will be in a separate MDB linked back to the existing database. Ultimately, it will be a traditionally split database design. 2) Instead of linking my forms and reports DIRECTLY to the linked queries, I'm going to create simple select queries that use expressions to convert the jacked up field names to a common naming convention. 3) Once the queries are ready, the new forms and reports will be based on them. Since the field names will technically be the same, all I'll have to do is change the record source to reflect the change in table names. In a sense, I'll be providing an alias of sorts for the jacked up names. The temporary queries will server as an intermediate layer of sorts. The total number of forms and reports in both databases will be VERY minimal, so we're not discussing anything major. Any ideas? Has anyone else tried this? Note: I've been working with Access for nearly 10 years now and have encountered a wide variety of situations (but have never had to try this) and I'm fully aware of the cavet and pitfalls of trying to change object names too deep into development. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|