[AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access Question.

John Bartow john at winhaven.net
Tue Oct 28 10:30:36 CST 2003


Frank:
I haven't got any programming advice for you but...

Since you are a Network Engineer maybe that gives you the opening to say "I
don't know how to do that - maybe you should hire an outside consultant on
this job".

I realize its a tough thing to say but it sounds like you're placing
yourself in the future gun sights of the "big blame gun". It isn't your
idea; it is bound to turn out badly in the future; but you're the one who
"did" it, so its going to be your fault...

Maybe its not something you can do, but its worth considering.

JB

Learn from others mistakes: change "fool me once shame on you - fool me
twice shame on me"
into fool someone else once shame on you...


> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Frank Tanner
> III
> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 12:41 PM
> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access Question.
>
>
> That's because I *AM* a network engineer...hehehe  By
> profession I tend to think modular....hehehe
>
> My boss wants a guarantee of no overlapping.  This is
> the only way I can think of doing it without coding
> mountains of logic into each form that I am creating.
> The more logic I have to put in to account for every
> possible contingency the larger the chance for errors
> becomes.  Peeling off one record and storing it in a
> temporary table will allow me to use the same logic
> over and over again, plus guarantee that there will be
> no overlaps.
>
> --- William Hindman <wdhindman at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > ...I'm sorry Frank but this doesn't sound like much
> > of a "reason" at all
> > ...you're violating data normalization rules all
> > over the place and creating
> > tables where a simple flag field and query would be
> > much more apropos ...I
> > realize that you may not control things as much as
> > you'd like but this
> > sounds like something a network engineer would build
> > rather than a database
> > designer ...I thought Drew was on the mark before
> > and even more so now :((((
> >
> > William Hindman
> > <http://www.freestateproject.org> - Do you want
> > liberty in your lifetime?
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Frank Tanner III" <pctech at mybellybutton.com>
> > To: "Access Developers discussion and problem
> > solving"
> > <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
> > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 12:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: [AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access
> > Question.
> >
> >
> > > Because the back-end tables are going to be
> > accessed
> > > by several people at once and we want to avoid ANY
> > > possibility of duplication.
> > >
> > > The reason why we're moving them to different
> > tables
> > > after processing is for marketing to keep track of
> > > different functions based upon the data in tables
> > > specific to certain criteria.  IE.  Customers that
> > > fill out a questionnaire go into one table,
> > customers
> > > that decline to go into another table, and
> > customers
> > > that would like to answer the questionnaire later
> > go
> > > into yet another table.
> > >
> > > The front-end itself has to be as generic as
> > possible
> > > yet cover all contingencies based upon what
> > someone is
> > > doing at a particular given point in time.
> > >
> > > --- Drew Wutka <DWUTKA at marlow.com> wrote:
> > > > Just curious why you would want to physically
> > 'move'
> > > > the data, instead of
> > > > just adding a field to track the 'status' of it.
> > > > You could have a byte
> > > > field where 0 is 'new', 1 is 'in use' and other
> > > > numbers could represent
> > > > where the data 'ends up' as you put it.
> > > >
> > > > Drew
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Frank Tanner III
> > > > [mailto:pctech at mybellybutton.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 10:41 AM
> > > > To: Database Advisors
> > > > Subject: [AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access
> > > > Question.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ok....Here we go.  Hang on to your
> > > > bloomers....hehehe
> > > >
> > > > I am using a sort of "check out" system in order
> > to
> > > > ensure that duplicates are not contacted.  It
> > works
> > > > like this...
> > > >
> > > > I have a back-end database table that is my
> > master
> > > > table of records.  I want my people to click a
> > > > button
> > > > called "Get Information" that will read the
> > first
> > > > available record into a "make table query" to
> > create
> > > > a
> > > > temporary local front-end table and delete it
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > master table in the back-end.  Sort of like
> > checking
> > > > out a book from the library.  Once this record
> > is
> > > > pulled from the master table in the back-end, it
> > > > will
> > > > never go back into that back-end table.  it will
> > go
> > > > into other back-end tables, depending on the
> > > > disposition of the information.  Sorta like
> > this...
> > > >
> > > > Get Information pulls "next available record"
> > from
> > > > tbl_customer_info.  Preferrably via a make table
> > > > query, and stuffs it into a front-end table
> > called
> > > > tmp_customer_info and completely removes said
> > record
> > > > from the back-end tbl_customer_info table.
> > > >
> > > > Once the local work has been done it will be
> > "saved"
> > > > to a different back-end table and the local
> > table,
> > > > tmp_customer_information, will be
> > cleared/deleted.
> > > > Thus the need for some sort of make table type
> > of
> > > > query.  Then the next time that a user clicks
> > the
> > > > Get
> > > > Information, this process starts all over again.
> > > >
> > > > I'm kind of at a loss as to how to do this.  Any
> > > > ideas?  Thank you.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > AccessD mailing list
> > > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > AccessD mailing list
> > > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > AccessD mailing list
> > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AccessD mailing list
> > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>




More information about the AccessD mailing list