Does Access 2010 still have the Memo truncation issue?

[brunopg7]

Does Access 2010 still have the Memo truncation issue:
By default, Access scans the first 25 rows to guess the data type of the column.


Thanks!

 

[boblarson]

Does Access 2010 still have the Memo truncation issue:
By default, Access scans the first 25 rows to guess the data type of the column.

Okay, you have me confused at the moment. What does the second sentence have to do with the first? I've not seen where the second sentence about the scanning of rows would have to do with memo fields being truncated. But the answer is yes, there are still things you must do to avoid memo field truncation in Access 2010.

 

[brunopg7]

Sorry.... here is a better explanation:

In Access 2003 when a user click analyze with excel on a report, the 280th row has a field that is over 255 characters and all the other fields before that is less than 255. The problem is that Access 2003 uses the first 25 column to guess the data type so it guess Text or something like that when I would like it to make the field Memo so the 280th row won't get truncated when it gets exported to excel.

My questions is: Does Access 2010 also check the first 25 rows and therefore cause the same issue or does Access 2010 offer a solution for this.

My employer is considering switching to Access 2010 (if it offers a solution) rather than me coding a solution...

Thanks!

 

[boblarson]

The Analyze with Excel will truncate it regardless of whether it is in the first record or 280th record. If you want the full field you need to export it using the CopyFromRecordset method (making sure the query you use doesn't have criteria on it - if you need criteria build the query with all fields EXCEPT the memo field and then use that query in another one with the original table joined back in and then select the fields from the first query and the memo field from the table).

There are times where even that won't work so the only way is to build the Excel file row by row by iterating through the recordset. I recently had to do that for one of my solutions.

 

[brunopg7]

Thanks Bob.

So I guess I'll let my boss know that it doesn't make a difference if it's Access 2003 or Access 2010?

 

[Banana]

Wouldn't it be better if the format is consistent, just to import into an empty table with column predefined? Whenever I can do that, I do it at all times instead of depending on Access to guess the data types same all times.

I guess you also can get similar effect by using a Import/Export specifications but I've yet to bother with it.