Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsFormsForms ProgrammingQueriesModules / DAO / VBAReports / PrintingMacrosDatabase DesignSecurityConversionImporting / LinkingSQL Server / ADPMultiuser / NetworkingReplicationSetup / ConfigurationDeveloper ToolkitsActiveX ControlsNew UsersGeneral 1General 2
Access DirectoryToolsTutorialsUser Groups
Related Topics
SQL ServerOther DB ProductsMS OfficeMore Topics ...

MS Access Forum / Forms Programming / November 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Problem with limit of DoCmd.RunSQL

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Otto Miros - 30 Nov 2005 15:45 GMT
Hi,
I use the command

    DoCmd.RumSQL (select * into tempTB from table1)

in VBA.

The command runs fine but only insert 199 items. (tabel1 has 3000 items)

How can I run the command, so that all 3000 items are insert in tempTB.

Thanks
Otto
Klatuu - 30 Nov 2005 16:18 GMT
There are 3000 rows in table1 and only 199 are getting into tempTB?  How
strange.  This is not, however AFAIK, a problem with the RunSQL (It is
mispelled in the post, by the way).  Are there validation rules in tempTB
that may be excluding records.  Also, I would suggest you use:
CurrentDb.Execute("select * into tempTB from table1;") instead.  You will be
suprised at how much faster it is.

> Hi,
> I use the command
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Thanks
> Otto
Otto Miros - 30 Nov 2005 21:19 GMT
You are right the statement CurrentDB.Execute(..) is much faster, but the
result is the same-
I do not use any validation rules.

The statement is very simple, just select * into table2 from table1

The result is alway 199 Rows.

Any ideas?

Thanks Otto

> There are 3000 rows in table1 and only 199 are getting into tempTB?  How
> strange.  This is not, however AFAIK, a problem with the RunSQL (It is
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>> Thanks
>> Otto
Klatuu - 30 Nov 2005 21:51 GMT
I mean validation rules on table2 either at the table or field levels.  Also,
I would carefully examine table1.  There may be some data corruption or some
other problem with it.  If a SELECT INTO statement were limited to 199 rows,
SQL would be worthless.  There is some other problem you have not yet
identified.

> You are right the statement CurrentDB.Execute(..) is much faster, but the
> result is the same-
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> >> Thanks
> >> Otto
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.