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 / General 1 / December 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

2 Beginner Access question

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
effendi@epitome.com.sg - 28 Dec 2005 14:19 GMT
I am trying to learn how to develop using Access to front end a MS SQL
back database. I am new to this so please bear with me.

1. I have a lookup table for Saluation, where I hv an ID which for each
salution type and a cloumn to store the Salutation itself for example

1 Mr
2 Mrs

etc

2 In my person table I store  the Salutation ID ie 1 or 2 etc.

How do I ensure that when users update using a Lookup, only 1 or 2 for
example is passed into the person table?

2. I have subforms linked by IDs, how do I ensure when user create new
record via the subform, the ID is inherited ?

Thanks in advance
pietlinden@hotmail.com - 29 Dec 2005 00:55 GMT
this is a joke, right?
use the combobox wizard for #1.  Set limit to list=true. also, don't
bother with lookups.  They're a nightmare.  If you don't believe me,
try creating queries with them.

2. how about enforcing referential integrity between the tables?

Time to get the manual out, I think.
Fendi Baba - 29 Dec 2005 02:51 GMT
Thanks for the response. I'm glad its easy for you. I'm completely new
to programming on RDMS, I really appreciate the pointers
Tim Marshall - 29 Dec 2005 03:31 GMT
> don't
> bother with lookups.  They're a nightmare.  If you don't believe me,
> try creating queries with them.

But, lookup tables are a fundamental concept in relational database
design, ie, many to many entity relationships, so I don't understand
this remark.  Mind you, the OP is using the term "look up" in the wrong
context here, though his approach is correct, albeit depending on one's
point of view, possibly overkill for salutations.  Is that where you're
coming from?
Signature

Tim   http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~tmarshal/
^o<
/#) "Burp-beep, burp-beep, burp-beep?" - Quaker Jake
/^^ "What's UP, Dittoooooo?" - Ditto

Larry Linson - 29 Dec 2005 05:07 GMT
>> don't
>> bother with lookups.  They're a nightmare.  If you don't believe me,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> view, possibly overkill for salutations.  Is that where you're coming
> from?

Lookup _Tables_ are fine. It's the abominable Lookup Fields that The Boys
and Girls In Redmond, in their wisdom, inflicted upon poor Access
developers, that he is cautioning against.

 Larry Linson
 Microsoft Access MVP
Fendi Baba - 29 Dec 2005 10:08 GMT
Hi everyone thanks for the responses. My lookup tables for used for
more than just salutation but I thought it was a simple enough idea
that I can extrapolate the concept.

I also need to know how this could be done for example as I need to
pass a foreign key to another table for example, I have table with
schools information. When create a new record for teachers, they
obviously need to select a school which the teacher belong to but I
also update the correspoding teacher's record with the school ID.

Does this make sense?

Regards

Effendi Baba
Tim Marshall - 29 Dec 2005 17:11 GMT
> Lookup _Tables_ are fine. It's the abominable Lookup Fields that The Boys
> and Girls In Redmond, in their wisdom, inflicted upon poor Access
> developers, that he is cautioning against.

Ahhh, I see what you're talking about.  Sorry, Piet!  8)
--
Tim   http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~tmarshal/
^o<
/#) "Burp-beep, burp-beep, burp-beep?" - Quaker Jake
/^^ "What's UP, Dittoooooo?" - Ditto
pietlinden@hotmail.com - 29 Dec 2005 21:04 GMT
Larry & Tim,
I was thinking about that hideous lookup wizard thing.  Not the join
table that splits a many-to-many relationship.  The m-m tables are
absolutely necessary.  That wizard thing causes more problems than it
solves, in my experience.  That's what I meant.
Fendi Baba - 31 Dec 2005 00:11 GMT
Thanks everyone for the responses, I managed to find a solution by
creating a Combo box bound to the ID fields. Now, I'm off trying to
figure out other things :)

Regards
 
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.