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
|
|||
|
|||
Updating two identical formatted tables with one form
At present I have a membership database with all members held in one table. I
have been asked to split this table into two tables - family and individual members. The user still wants to view all the records in both tables using the same form as at present. However if I use a UNION query on the two tables and link the form to this query, I have found that although I can view all the records from both tables, I now cannot update them. Any advice on a better way to design and link the tables would be appreciated. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Updating two identical formatted tables with one form
Cynw,
Let's start from the beginning why did *whoever* think families should be segregated from individual member? My better way is put them back into one table and use a field to indicate if it is an individual. Any if *whoever* wants to see all the individuals you can run a query based on the before mentioned field. -- Gina Whipp 2010 Microsoft MVP (Access) "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors II http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm "Cynw" wrote in message ... At present I have a membership database with all members held in one table. I have been asked to split this table into two tables - family and individual members. The user still wants to view all the records in both tables using the same form as at present. However if I use a UNION query on the two tables and link the form to this query, I have found that although I can view all the records from both tables, I now cannot update them. Any advice on a better way to design and link the tables would be appreciated. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Updating two identical formatted tables with one form
The individual members already have a field that is set to "yes" in the
present table. I work for a charity and the committee want the Individual members to be held in a seperate table. People in the office need to be able to look at information about members and do this via a form which displays all the details of a member. However as they do not know if the enquiry is about a family member or an individual member, we need to display all members using the same form. Hope that make my design problem easier to understand. Thanks. "Gina Whipp" wrote: Cynw, Let's start from the beginning why did *whoever* think families should be segregated from individual member? My better way is put them back into one table and use a field to indicate if it is an individual. Any if *whoever* wants to see all the individuals you can run a query based on the before mentioned field. -- Gina Whipp 2010 Microsoft MVP (Access) "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors II http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm "Cynw" wrote in message ... At present I have a membership database with all members held in one table. I have been asked to split this table into two tables - family and individual members. The user still wants to view all the records in both tables using the same form as at present. However if I use a UNION query on the two tables and link the form to this query, I have found that although I can view all the records from both tables, I now cannot update them. Any advice on a better way to design and link the tables would be appreciated. . |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Updating two identical formatted tables with one form
Cynw,
You say they are in the same table then no Union query needed. You can run query and sort by the Yes/No field and all the Individuals will be lumped together and your query will be updateable. Explain to them that putting indivduals in a seperate table will cause you to have to use a Union query which can't be updated AND make it harder to maintain ALL members. Also, as I stated before you can run a query just showing individual members... Why would that not work for them? So in essence three queries needed... 1. All members who are a in a family 2. All individual members 3. All members which can be sorted to show family/individuals Now to help the out on you form you can place a field with something like this to help *see* what the member type is... ControlSource of the field: =IIf([YesNoField]=-1,"Individual","Family") -- Gina Whipp 2010 Microsoft MVP (Access) "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors II http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm "Cynw" wrote in message ... The individual members already have a field that is set to "yes" in the present table. I work for a charity and the committee want the Individual members to be held in a seperate table. People in the office need to be able to look at information about members and do this via a form which displays all the details of a member. However as they do not know if the enquiry is about a family member or an individual member, we need to display all members using the same form. Hope that make my design problem easier to understand. Thanks. "Gina Whipp" wrote: Cynw, Let's start from the beginning why did *whoever* think families should be segregated from individual member? My better way is put them back into one table and use a field to indicate if it is an individual. Any if *whoever* wants to see all the individuals you can run a query based on the before mentioned field. -- Gina Whipp 2010 Microsoft MVP (Access) "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors II http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm "Cynw" wrote in message ... At present I have a membership database with all members held in one table. I have been asked to split this table into two tables - family and individual members. The user still wants to view all the records in both tables using the same form as at present. However if I use a UNION query on the two tables and link the form to this query, I have found that although I can view all the records from both tables, I now cannot update them. Any advice on a better way to design and link the tables would be appreciated. . |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|