[AccessD] Memo field corruption

Susan Harkins ssharkins at gmail.com
Sat Jan 26 11:18:13 CST 2019

The main reason was to protect the rest of your data -- if the memo field is
corrupted, you're dealing with just the memo fields in that table. It won't
prevent corruption, just make it easier to fix if you do. 

Susan H 

In this page
characters at the bottom it says this:

The reason for these limitations is that memo content is not actually stored
in the table. Only a pointer to its location on disk is. This makes features
like sorting and grouping _very_ inefficient because the query has to use
the pointer to go "get" the text, evaluate it, and then apply the sorting
and grouping.

So - if the data is already NOT stored in the table, why create another
related table for memo fields?

I'd suggest trying to track down the source of this 'rule' before you go
further with it.  Maybe this was helpful for much older versions of Access
for some reason?

Good Luck,

I think a lot of "expert" database developers suggest keeping the memo field
in a separate table using a 1:1 or 1:n relationship -- just in case. 

Susan H. 

I always include memo fields in the same table.  I haven't heard of what you
described - have you seen that done somewhere?  


When you include a memo field, do you include it in the table or do you
relate to a second table that stores just the memo field? 

Susan H. 

More information about the AccessD mailing list