Dan Waters
dwaters at usinternet.com
Wed Jul 30 17:07:34 CDT 2008
Susan & Liz I looked at one of the affected tables in SQL, and it was the FK constraint name, which I can change. SSMA also created an extra index, which I can delete. I've only got 7 of these so I can carry on! I got a warning for each of these in the SSMA Report, but it didn't explain why it was changing the Foreign Key constraint name. Thanks! Dan -----Original Message----- From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Susan Harkins Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:46 PM To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Must Relating Fields Have Different Names? Did you get a warning? Have you checked the Assessment Report to see if there's an explanation? When you say foreign key names, you mean the foreign key constraint name? Susan H. >I just went through my first shot at upsizing an mdb using SSMA. SSMA > changed all the foreign key names to something different. In Access, I've > been keeping the Foreign Key field names identical to the field it is > related to for ease of programming. I often need to be explicit about > which > table the field is in, but not a big deal. > > What would be a big deal for me is to change all the foreign keys to > unique > names! Then, instead of 'MainID = " & txtMainID, txtMainID could be equal > to a variety of different field names. > > Are different names required in SQL Server? Or is SSMA just trying to be > 'helpful'? > > Thanks! > Dan > > > _______________________________________________ > dba-SQLServer mailing list > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ dba-SQLServer mailing list dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver http://www.databaseadvisors.com