Shamil Salakhetdinov
shamil at smsconsulting.spb.ru
Tue Mar 8 16:41:35 CST 2011
Jim -- Yes, it will work - just when you'll find some "strange" MS Access behaviour - first of all check for reserved words used which are not put into square brackets. Thank you. -- Shamil -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jm.hwsn Sent: 9 ????? 2011 ?. 1:14 To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' Subject: Re: [AccessD] Access Reserved words Shamil, I have done some renaming, but it seems to be a waste of time if "it works" without too many issues. Thanks, JIm -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Shamil Salakhetdinov Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 3:41 PM To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' Subject: Re: [AccessD] Access Reserved words Hi Jim -- Just put that fields' and tables' names into square brackets wherever you'll be referencing them. But if you have time and there are not that much places to rename that fields and tables - do renaming. The issues when that fields' and tables' names are not put into square brackets could be (query) compilation errors as well as "strange behavior" of MS Access including GPF-ing... Thank you. -- Shamil -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jm.hwsn Sent: 8 ????? 2011 ?. 22:29 To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' Subject: [AccessD] Access Reserved words My customer of the Access 2007 project I'm working on wanted some functionality that is not native to Access. For example, they wanted full Rich Text Formatting for several fields. These fields are used as feedback papers for the users. They purchased the FMS Total Access Ultimate Suite to be used with this project. One of the components is the Total Access Analyzer. I received the suite after I essentially finished the majority of the work. I ran the analyzer and it told me that I have 954 objects documented. It has 85 tables, 451 queries, 125 forms, 74 reports, 1 macro and 25 modules. It also informed me that there was a table that wasn't being used and a field in two queries that didn't belong to any table. It also told me it found 244 errors, 3042 suggestions on improving it and 830 performance issues. I haven't worked through most of them yet, but many are small things such as "transaction log" for a query is turned on and should be turned off. One item identified is: a column "conflicts with future SQL Server reserved word." I did some research and found out the reserved words it talks about have been on the list since at least 2000 and is still on list for SQL Server 2010. Another item was: a column "conflicts with Jet reserved word." In the description it says it's a "minor issue." I am aware of the problems of using reserved words. BUT. I used "language" and "comp" as field names. I should have known better, but I also used "order" and "default." I have had NO issues with these reserved words - yet. My question is: Should I spend the time to change the field names? If I don't change them, what kind of problems will it create? Thanks, Jim -- 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