Search results

Yes, but note the above trick - if you JUST use the view name - no SQL for the combo source, the form loads even faster. You not notice this effect unless/until you have about 3 or more combo's on the page. So, it's a "minor" issue, but I have seen this trick reduce form loads times. So, for...

Another trick that helps? Just specify the view for the combo box, not a SQL query. They again will load faster. This can't always be done. But, if you have say 3-5 combo boxes on a form? You notice a slight improvment. So, JUST the view specifed for the combo box source. Now, to be fair, views...

As noted, PT queries and a combo box don't play nice here. Access client can't filter the PT query correctly. And for messy sql? Again, move to server, and then base the combo box on that view...... So, a PT query for a combo box simply does not work well, but building the view and using that...

I can't agree more. Really, with the modern hardware we have? It near all comes down to design, and the gains to be had for today's standard and decent hardware? Not going to help. A mid range, or even bottom feeder computer today gives you what a state of the art $10,000 computer was 10 years...

Actually, I can add one more FYI to the issue of combo boxes. Do NOT use a pass-through query to drive a bound combo box. But, why? This advice seems counter intuitive, since after all, a PT query is perhaps the fastest performing way to pull data from SQL server, right? Well, there is one...

yes. in fact, the #1 developer time saving tip I can share? Any time you have a query with multiple joins? Convert that to that to a SQL view, and link to that view. But why this suggestion over say a pass-through query, or even perhaps say some stored procedure on SQL server? Simple: cost...

Well, as noted, you can get more then 1 second for some disk intensive tasks. So, the better disk can help even more - that 15 seconds vs 14? Probably not going to be noticed. No real changes to my previous advice here. Anything more would be beyond my pay grade and knowledge..... R Albert

Could not agree more! And, I not a big hardware guy, and not a gamer. Really, today we are spoiled with hardware. So, for me? Just about any machine today is more computer then we could dream about years ago. I often when dragging and copying a Access database - say 130 megs? You can drag...

Well, things have vast improved over the years. So, while at one time, say a VPN between two locations, and running a split Access database? Was not that practical. Now, well, actually it is! However, if the VPN was being used say by “at home” workers? Then that falls down, since it not all...

Ok, now that changes things a wee bit, but again, with hardware where it stands? Well, since the network bottleneck is gone? Well, as long as one has a multi-core CPU. And these days, that's probably a min of 6 threads, and more CPU's? Then that will suffice, and once again, throwing more...

The problem is that if you do what I done for years? That is build the relationship using the UI/diagram tool? You THEN set/create the index after? (which is what most people probably do....) The diagram does not update - so, you don't notice this effect. I ONLY noticed this, because I was...

Ok, I HAVE to do a follow up post! One of the things I love by helping and posting to the community here? Well, you find out VERY interesting things! While I made a long winded post about how SSMS does not really tell you the difference between a one to one, and one to many? I am WRONG!!! -...

If just looking to add content, information, then some type of CMS as WordPress is a really great way to go. But, if you looking to build say forms, code and an applicaiton? (like moving some Access application to the web)? Then of course a different road is required....... And don't worry -...

LOL!!!! - don't get me started on that issue! (as a FYI: I actually was one of the few Access developers that supported this amazing feature!!!). R Albert

Actually, the answer is a round about way is kind of funny! SSMS designer lets you setup relationships, but it actually NEVER calls them anything! (so, no names like “one to many” or “one to one” etc. is ever used, nor displayed). On the other hand? I don’t consider that a many to many...

If you 100% local, no network involved? The having a really great and fast hard drive is the ticket. In most cases (at least these days), Access is not limited by CPU cycles - we have boatloads of those. Hence, in near all cases, it's not CPU, but WHEN access has to use/get/grab external...

Sure, you could do this, but you talking about editing "one" record. If we were to limit this discussion to not a form + sub form (which by nature mean repeating reocrds in the sub form)? Sure, then FoxPro could be aruged to handle this issue. But, on the other hand, EVEN in Accesss, and EVEN...

Ok, and for my "narrative" here? My narrative was not so much about having a single "save" button for the form + subform, but ONLY when you have or want a transaction type of save, or NOT to allow the save. So, my example was the sub form in which several rows are added but the total MUST match...

For a lot of us here, VB, then VB.net, and all the while we kept using VBA (in Access). Today, Python is super popular - much like VB was back when so many of us started our journey into computers. In many ways, Python is the "go to" choice and language for oh so many today..... Regardless, a...

Ok, I'm going to give my 2 cents on this one. It would be REALLY cool and really nice if we could wrap (with ease) a main form + sub form editing into one simple transaction. After all, from a user's point of view, when editing say a invoice (and the classic sub form of invoice details)? To...