Search results

Access allows 255 concurrent users - 255 for read only access, much less if most users are manipulating data. I can think of a couple of things: 1. Is there a possibility that some of your users can locate and open the backend? Worth investigating! 2. Does each user have the right file/folder...

Sure thing! A fully automated routine wouldn't require opening the file. The suggestion was just a workaround to the current problem in the meantime. Looks like aaronb50 will soon begin working on reading from the Word doc. :D

... can't always guarantee that on here Andy! :D I don't fully understand your requirement, but perhaps this change: If that doesn't work, then expand on what it is that's wrong with the filter and what you're trying to do.

You might need to re-install Access. What version of Access (i.e. the db version and also the version that's being used to open the db) are you running? Also tell us your version of Windows. Somewhere down the line, we may still need a cut-down version of your db (as already requested by...

Following pbaldy's advice of re-structuring the code: 'All validation - blank and beginning char If IsNull(Me.[User Name]) Then strName = "User Name" strMsg = "You must enter a value for " & strName & "." ElseIf Left(Me.[User Name], 1) <> "u" Then strName = "User...

Is it Google sir? :D

As a side note, following The_Doc_Man's advice, remember to be explicit with your referencing, i.e. TheWorkbook.Worksheets("name") or TheWorkbook.Worksheets(n)

But then again what's the point of creating a function and then using it in a macro if all of it can be done in VBA? It defeats the purpose of using a "simple macro". I believe it's related to this thread: http://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=279074

Some other thoughts. Rather than move the file, you should be able to copy it to the new destination then have a separate process that periodically attempts to delete the original file in the original location if it already exists in the new location. First, attempt to move the file, if it...

Quite basic references so it shouldn't cause any problems. So now what happens, it displays the same error message as before and then crashes?

Once you have a distinct set of policy numbers on both sides, the match will almost be one-to-one, and I use the word "almost" loosely. From that point, you can (in another query) join the matches with an INNER JOIN against the table with the duplicate and longer formatted policy numbers. Makes...

There's a reason why I requested that you should get distinct policy numbers for testing purposes.

There might be a way. But for starters, get DISTINCT values of both policy numbers in both tables. But still keen to know how long the queries you're running took.

On closer inspection it appears to be a pretty unique error message. It seems to be an application failure as opposed to an error thrown during runtime. I didn't notice the C++ part to it. My belief is that your form or perhaps your db is corrupt. I would advise that you create a new form from...

Good point jd. I think it depends on usage. If none of the wildchard characters are used then it may use indexing (which defeats the whole point of doing a pattern match). But the point of using LIKE in this case was to take advantage of the INNER JOIN which, naturally, performs better than a...

Good to hear! If in doubt, Debug.Print the string and you'll be able to spot any syntax errors.

You're welcome! :D

You're welcome!

Just "grandfathered". The grandfathered status isn't calculated, it's a status that's earned by merit right? Whereas "new hire" is a calculated status where the hire date is between "1/1" and "30/6". Only the grandfathered status will link to the employees table. I don't remember what...

It's taking long because one policy number could match thousands of records in the other table, so think about how many times it has to do this.