Search results

The laydays are not a lookup. I need to be able to insert the beginning and end dates and record that they have been accepted by the relevant party by making the Accepted field yes. There are 3 sets of Laydays: Inital: Which are agreed at the start of the year and cover about 2 weeks spread...

Thanks, The "document location" and "which invoice" tables could be set up as you suggest (I had not considered using a combo). Unfortunately the laydays table hold dates (T_LD_Beglay and T_LD_Endlay) and a yes/no (T_LD_LaydaysAccepted). It is the Layday fields that I have been working on...

I have set up some tables as shown in the diagram below but I am having a problem with queries. I want to end up with a continuous form that will hold a substantial number of fields (51) for each shipment (most of the data will come from other tables but 11 pieces of data come from the left...

David, Thanks for your response. Looking at the query and the module, I'm not sure that it is achieving what I am trying to do. It seems to draw only on the invoices that have been presented and entered in the "shipment invoices" table. My objective was to display the status of all the...

Here is the cut down DB with My queries are the ones Marked TestCrossTab & TestCrossTabPlusExpected. JB

David, Thanks, I posted this in the queries forum as it is now definately a query issue. My first post was I thought an issue with the tables. Having used the Cross tab solution you and Atomic Shrimp proposed, I am now stumped again. The Mdb is currently 5740Kb which is too large to post...

I have 2 tables as follows; Shipments .................Invoices SId (PK)......................IId LoadNumber ................S_SId CargoId ......................InvoiceType (10 Types) ContractId ..................InvoiceSubType (4 Sub Types) Etc ............................DateReceived...

Ceinwyn, Are you sure you ticked the "enforce referential integrity" box when you set up the joins? you also mention pre filled tables, I believe that if the data was already in the tables when you set up, it may not have been enforced. I must admit I'm not an expert, but that is where I...

Sports Guy and HiTechCoach, Many thanks for your input some usefull stuff here. JB

David, Sorry I did not understand your message which said; "Is there a particular need to have the data presented vertically? I would have thought that doing horizontally would make the task alot easier. Query grouped by sid by type with the other fields as expressions" Unfortunately as...

Atomic Shrimp, Thanks for the warning, I will have to bild in a work around for that because I suspect it will happen. That said the compliance query I'm building seems to be doing the trick at the moment. Once again many thanks.

Thanks Atomic Shrimp, I have always had problems with cross tabs before and had not considered using one for this task, but it looks like it has worked. :) I hope to have the form up and running by this evening. Many thanks for your kind assistance. JB

Gemma-The -Husky, Thanks for your response. This particular Db is V2 of one we already have in place. V1 held a huge amount of data in a few large un-normalised table. Whilst this worked reasonably well it had was a bit too slow. V2 brings together a wide variety of factors relating to...

Hi, I have been working on this since last October (on and off), without success:(. I have two tables as follows: Shipments .................Invoices SId (PK)......................IId LoadNumber ................S_SId CargoId ......................InvoiceType (10 Types) ContractId...

Wis, thanks for the response. If by cascaded you mean one union with a number of queries underpinning it the answer is yes. I have already checked every individual component works in both split and unsplit dbs, but when the db is split and I run the whole thing I get no results shown. I have...

My issue is that the query I am running and the form it feeds is pretty heavy duty (Unfortunately it can not be slimmed down). When I run it in an un-split db it works well, but a split db seems to use additional links (I believe this is something to do with "Jet" :confused: but I am not...

I have a complex union Query which works exceedingly well in an unsplit database. It is based on around 20 other queries which are in turn based on a number of tables and queries. This feeds a form which sumarises the status of every aspect of the db in one page.:) Problem is when I split...

Try putting <=[Please enter a date] on its own this will work You might suggest a format too ie. <=[Please enter a date. dd/mm/yy]

Are your dates in a date field? Assuming they are you could use <= 01/04/09 in the criteria in the query. this will show anything earlier then 00:00 hrs on the first of April 2009.

Switch is brilliant, but you should finish it off with a statement which will return a 'catch all' result if the previous statements don't trigger a response ie Switch (OwnerID=1, "Table", OwnerID=2, "Desk", OwnerID=15, "Mirrow",True,0) Hope this helps.