[AccessD] Form corruption?

[Jim Dettman]

 That's the number I remember from a few years back as well for the last
couple of releases.  The number does seem to float a bit, but it's always
right around the same number. 

 I've never seen numbers along the lines Janet is seeing and the question I
have there; Janet are you saving the form each time or no?

 And keep in mind that there are two basic work arounds for this:

1. Create the form from scratch each time.

2. Create all the controls you need, then unhide/hide as needed.

 Either may allow you to get the job done without a significant amount of
re-writing.


Jim. 

-----Original Message-----
From: AccessD [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of
John W. Colby
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 01:31 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Form corruption?

nope.  I just got that same 1040 number when programmatically creating 
recordset objects.

John W. Colby

On 3/9/2015 12:58 PM, Janet Erbach wrote:
> Not in this test - I just made it very basic.  Are you thinking I'll get
> different results if I put heftier objects in?
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:51 AM, John W. Colby <jwcolby at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So these are not text box, combo box, list, radio button or check box
>> controls?
>>
>> John W. Colby
>>
>>
>> On 3/9/2015 12:43 PM, Janet Erbach wrote:
>>
>>> Garbage collectors, eh?  Then why didn't they come for this app the
moment
>>> it hit the floor??  :)
>>>
>>> None of the objects I'm drawing are bound to anything in this test -
just
>>> rectangles with labels.  And I just got as high as 30,159.  But it
doesn't
>>> really matter;  I can still make my point that this is an unstable
>>> approach.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:34 AM, John W. Colby <jwcolby at gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>   Thanks for doing that Janet.
>>>> I suspect that this has to do with instances of DAO recordsets.  I have
>>>> never tested controls per se but I did once test DAO recordsets and
came
>>>> up
>>>> with that same number.  I would bet that if you tested with non data
>>>> aware
>>>> controls you would find entirely (and larger) numbers.  Things like
>>>> labels
>>>> and lines etc.
>>>>
>>>> I am guessing that there is some sort of garbage collection process
that
>>>> is scavenging the dao pointers, which allows the different numbers you
>>>> are
>>>> seeing.
>>>>
>>>> John W. Colby
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/9/2015 11:29 AM, Janet Erbach wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   And I am doing that very test right now.  With interesting results,
too
>>>>> -
>>>>> inconsistent ones.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1)  When I run the test to draw objects on the form one right after
>>>>> another, Access consistently chokes at object 1040.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2)  After I delete those 1040 objects and start drawing again, Access
>>>>> will
>>>>> add another 1040 - a total of 2080 having been drawn to the form in
all
>>>>> -
>>>>> before it chokes.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3)  If I draw in 'batches' - add 500, delete 500, add 500 more - I can
>>>>> keep
>>>>> going for a long time.  (This is with saving the form, closing it
down,
>>>>> and
>>>>> re-opening it after each batch.)  I got up to a total count 20,000
some
>>>>> objects that had been drawn to the form over it's 'life time' before
>>>>> access
>>>>> gave up.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4)  I started playing with drawing objects in different batch sizes.
I
>>>>> just now ran a few batches of 500, then ran one of 2,000, then upped
it
>>>>> to
>>>>> 5,000 .  Access choked  after drawing a total of 6120 objects.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it seems that Access is inconsistent in it's response to how many
>>>>> objects have been drawn, deleted, and re-drawn on the form over the
>>>>> course
>>>>> of it's lifetime.  Which is the ammo I need to bring to my boss when I
>>>>> tell
>>>>> him the whole form handling routine has to be re-written.
>>>>>
>>>>> Janet
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:38 PM, John W. Colby <jwcolby at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>    It sounds like it's time for Janet to do a test!
>>>>>
>>>>>> ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John W. Colby
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/3/2015 7:35 PM, Jim Dettman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    The number given has always been 754,  but that has drifted
upwards
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> over 1,000 in later versions.   I posted all the counts a few years
>>>>>>> back.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     On Mar 3, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Charlotte Foust <
>>>>>>> charlotte.foust at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>>> It used to be in the documentation, but I haven't looked it up
>>>>>>>> recently
>>>>>>>> because it became moot after they introduced tab controls.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Charlotte
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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