Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Access2000 & sequence as primary key in view : #DELETED

From: Arnaud Lesauvage <thewild(at)freesurf(dot)fr>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Access2000 & sequence as primary key in view : #DELETED
Date: 2006-10-12 07:48:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-odbc
Hiroshi Inoue a écrit :
> Arnaud Lesauvage wrote:
>> Hiroshi Inoue a écrit :
>>> Though I don't understand the problem wholly, the virtual column "index"
>>> doesn't seem appropriate for the identifier. How do you find the row
>>> using the "index" ?
>> In Access, "index" is fine as a field identifier. You just have to 
>> reference it between brackets : [index].
> What I meant is, for example
> 1. Issue the query "select * from my_view".
> 2. You may get some data whose "index" = 1, 2, 3, .....
> 3. Then issue the query "select * from my_view where index = 1"
> 4. The query would return no data.

This is absolutely true, but actually this field is not really meant 
to be used as a primary key. I need it because this view is the base 
table of a csv export (and I need a unique "index" field in this export).
I chose it as the primary key in access only because I had no other 
"correct" field (integer, unique), and I know that I need this kind of 
field for a linked table to work correctly in Access.
Now I think that this #DELETED probleme does come from the fact that 
the index changes whenever you query the view.
For the moment, I use the view's "real" primary key in Access and it 
works OK (it is a 2 columns primary key though, but on two integer 

In response to

pgsql-odbc by date

Next:From: ioguixDate: 2006-10-12 08:00:24
Subject: Re: LATIN1/9 conversion....
Previous:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 2006-10-12 07:42:34
Subject: Re: Access2000 & sequence as primary key in view : #DELETED

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group