jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Thu May 21 13:14:13 CDT 2009
And this was exactly the problem I was having, and exactly the solution I figured out. John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com Jim Dettman wrote: > Well since were back up, I'll post this again... > > Jim. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Dettman [mailto:jimdettman at verizon.net] > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 8:46 AM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD] An interesting "feature" in SQL Server > > > > That one has been around for a while: > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q278696 > > Jim. > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby > Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 6:29 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: [AccessD] An interesting "feature" in SQL Server > > I am starting work on a database at an old client that was converted to SQL > Server. I discovered > that if I enter records into a table that contains a bit field, and that bit > field is allowed to > store a null value, then any time I try to edit any field in that record > (at least through ODBC) I > get a "you have attempted to update a record being edited by another user" > kind of error message and > the update fails. I had to go into Management studio and set the bit to > either a zero or a -1 at > which point the edits work normally after that. > > Loverly. >