Recent content by cheekybuddha

Frank, didn't you go through all this already a few years ago back on UA? Why fire 42 queries when you are fetching identical data in six time periods? You can do the same with a maximum of 7 queries and probably fewer. If you want help sorting out speeding this up you should provide the...

I'm just curious why you need to rely on the data from the subform. Is it not already contained in the treeview? Certainly you ought to be able to get the number of clicked node's children directly, without having to perform an extra dlookup() And aren't the id's required already stored...

No he did not say to use ampersand

This is Arnel's query (using Allen Browne's ConcatRelated() ): TRANSFORM First( ConcatRelated( "TestedFor", "Table1", "DateReportDue=#" & Format([DateReportDue],"m/d/yyyy") & "# And Sample_ID = '" & [Sample_ID] & "'", "TestedFor", Chr(13) & Chr(10) ) ) AS TFor SELECT...

You will also need a group concatenation function for the output you show. @theDBguy can point you towards an example on his website.

I'm not sure my logic is correct! WE need to hear from @mloucel for clarification of what is required.

Can you post the full SQL of this original query?

SELECT InitialDate, FN, LN, ApprovedD WHERE InitialDate >= Date() - 15 OR ( InitialDate >= Date() - 90 AND ApprovedD IS NOT NULL ) ;

Equally, if you have the ItemNode object, you can also do: tvw.Nodes.Remove (ItemNode.Index)

What are you expecting tvw.Nodes("IT" & Me.ItemID) to return?

Are you sure that it is actually returning the caption - how are you discovering this? Is it by hovering your mouse over the variable in break mode? If so, the intellisense may just be showing the default property of the object, all the while the actual object is being returned in the code.

You can try: Set ItemNode = tvw.Nodes("IT" & Me.ItemID).Object ' or Set ItemNode = tvw.Nodes.Item("IT" & Me.ItemID)

OP has gone AWOLfor the time being. I guess we'll have to wait for clarification. For an array of c.200 values, I think a temp table is still probably the best solution - you can index the values for better performance on the join (if only a subset of array values is required), and also handle...

The two can achieve much the same effect. (eg SELECT a.ID, a.Fld FROM a INNER JOIN b ON a.Fld = b.Fld ; -- will produce the same as SELECT a.ID, a.Fld FROM a WHERE a.Fld IN ( SELECT b.Fld FROM b ); -- if table b contains three records in Fld: 'a', 'b', 'c', then also...

Usually. See Section 2 in this link (last bullet point).