Drew Wutka
DWUTKA at marlow.com
Tue Oct 28 13:39:45 CST 2003
Make table off of a select Top 1 query, then delete it. Again, this raises the issue of 'simultaneous' users, which is why I recommended adding a 'toggle' field, to set that first, before doing anything else. Drew -----Original Message----- From: Frank Tanner III [mailto:pctech at mybellybutton.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 12:34 PM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: RE: [AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access Question. I just want to be able to take record off of a database. Basically the first available one, no specific criteria and plug it into a table" made via a make table query. The way I thought of doing it is pretty crappy. I thought about making a form (hidden) that uses that database as it's bound property. Then on form open running a make table query to fill the "made" table and then a delete query to selete the record, then the invisible form shuts down. But that's a pretty crappy way of doing it. --- Drew Wutka <DWUTKA at marlow.com> wrote: > If you must you must. What question do you have > specifically about > 'peeling' the record? > > I would still put a flag in the main table, so that > at the very start of the > process, you set the flag, so the next instance of > the process gets the next > record. Then I would copy the data to the local > table, once copied, I would > then simply delete the one on the server. > > Is your question regarding code required to do it? > > Drew > > -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Tanner III > [mailto:pctech at mybellybutton.com] > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 1:28 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access > Question. > > > That would be acceptable to me, whether or not it is > acceptable to them. HOWEVER, it still doesn't > answer > my original question. > > Which was how to peel the record in the first place. > > Then, regardless of how the END result is, my > original > question would still remain the same. > > --- Nancy Lytle <nancy.lytle at auatac.com> wrote: > > Why not a compromise? Take the record from the > > Master Table, put it into > > temp and then put it into a new Table called > > Processed with a category > > column for completed, not interested and to be > > contacted later. Then create > > three queries with each one giving you the full > set > > of data for each > > category. The problem is that once you separate > the > > data, it is hard to put > > it back together again, kind of like > Humpty-Dumpty, > > and you never know what > > future requirements there may be, been there, done > > that, don't ever want to > > do it again:( > > > > Nancy Lytle > > EIS > > nancy.lytle at auatac.com > > > > > > > > -----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 1:46 PM > > To: Access Developers discussion and problem > solving > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] Yes. Another Silly Access > > Question. > > > > > > As I see it the worst possible case scenario is > that > > one record could become corrupt if the front-end > > gets > > whacked. Because the front-end would only be, > > temporarily I might add, storing one record. > Ever. > > > > Unfortunately, I was given a specific set of > > criteria > > as to how they wanted the back-end to be handled, > > and > > I cannot deviate from that. So, given that I am > > trying to come up with the easiest, and most > modular > > way of handling it. > > > > They are adamant about having one back-end table > > that > > contains all of the records to be pulled from, one > > table that contains the records that have been > > contacted and have answered the questions, one > table > > that contains the "not-interested" responses, and > > one > > table that contains the "call me back later" > > responses. I am not privvy to why they want it > that > > way, nor what they are going to do with it once it > > is > > complete. > > > > --- "Heenan, Lambert" <Lambert.Heenan at AIG.com> > > wrote: > > > I'd suggest you look at adding a "CheckedOut > > Status" > > > field to the original > > > back-end table, and also a "Who checked it out" > > > field. Doing it this way > > > means you never need to move the data from table > > to > > > table, instead just > > > change the values in those two fields. In > > addition, > > > there's no danger of > > > data getting lost when and if the user's front > end > > > copy gets trashed / > > > corrupted. > > > > > > Lambert > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Frank Tanner III > > > [SMTP:pctech at mybellybutton.com] > > > > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 11:41 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 > > > > > === message truncated === _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com