Why are Recordsets in Forms Read-Only when there are Unions involved?

[llyal]

Why are Recordsets in Forms Read-Only when there are Unions involved?

Through some tests, I have found that when a form is based on one table, the recordset can be updated through the form; however, when a form is based on a recordset with two or more tables, the form will treat the recordset as read-only;

Is this the best Access can do, or am i missing something? I would like to have a form be based on a recordset with two or more tables AND be able to do updates to this recordset through the form;

What is the how-to?

Thank you!
Llyal

 

[Carol]

Refer to answer in todays posting question "Recordset not updatable"

Good luck

 

[MikeAngelastro]

I don't think Llyal is using a Union query.

 

[MHM]

Some recordsets are read-only by definition - as UNIONs. For expl. all "GROUP BY"-SQLs dont't make sense to be editable, because if you edited data in there, more than one data-field needs to be changed - and you won't know before which one or how many.

Try this:
Use UNION and add any ID-field.
Then do Recordset2.FindFirst "ID=" & Recordset.ID at another Recordset.

 

[llyal]

Just to close this thread; the solution is to set RecordSetType to Dynaset(inconsistent updates), not just Dynaset; this is little documented and i cannot explain why Microsoft created two Dynasets to be used;

I apologize if my wording mislead people; i was creating joins, not unions;