Here is a quote from someone else's email
Are you using Row Versioning? This uses the xmin field so that it will be
necessary to relink the tables. MS Access can then use the primary key and
xmin to identify a row as exactly the same row it earlier retrieved. If you
don't do this access does uses all the fields (bar memo and BLOB's) in the
where condition of the update. This can lead to precision problems with
You will also need this in the back end to allow comparison of int4 to xid:
create function int4eq(xid,int4)
create operator =
This does fix the problem. The trouble is that access compares each field to
determine which record to update when really all it needs is the oid.
Relinking with row versioning fixed my problem. I don't know what to say if
you need creater precision... could you use numeric data type for really big
[mailto:pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Michael Calabrese
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ODBC] Float Percision with MS Access 97
I am sorry, but I guess I did not make my question
clear. I am not looking for greater backend precision
(ie moving to float8). There seems to be a
mis-comunication between Access and postgres with
Access is seeing the number with fewer digits than
want must be in postgres. If I do a :
UPDATE Parts SET Count = round(Count,4);
Then the access query from my first email will work.
This is a pain right now because my users will get a
write conflict error, call me, I will find the
offending field, do and Update with the round(x,4),
then it will work.
I could fix it by putting round(x,4) with all float
fields, but this seems like a poor fix.
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
In response to
pgsql-odbc by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2001-08-21 01:48:55|
|Subject: Re: New CVS doesn't compile |
|Previous:||From: Lee Harr||Date: 2001-08-20 23:52:54|
|Subject: Re: Missing Sequence File|