Strange Automation Issue

[Neil Ginsberg]

I have a strange situation with my Access 2000 database. I have code in the
database which has worked fine for years, and now all of a sudden doesn't
work fine on one or two of my client's machines. The code opens MS Word
through Automation and then opens a particular Word doc. It's still working
fine on most machines; but on one or two of them, the user is getting an
Automation Error. The code used is as follows:

Dim objWord As Word.Applicatio n
Set objWord = New Word.Applicatio n
objWord.Documen ts.Open FileName:=strFi lename, _
ConfirmConversi ons:=False, _
ReadOnly:=False , _
AddToRecentFile s:=False, _
Revert:=False, _
Format:=gcon_wd OpenFormatAuto 'this is global constant with
Word constant value

The Automation Error occurs on the third line, when trying to open the
document (the document does exist, so that's not the problem).

Even stranger than the fact that the problem's only happening on two out of
several dozen machines, is the following. I have a pared-down copy of the
database, that users use to take on the road with them and show to clients.
The pared-down version (call it "App B") was taken from the original (call
it "App A") with some functionality removed. Regarding the above code that's
failing, both App A and App B are identical, and both have the same
references.

Now, here's the really strange part.

On one computer that's having problems, App A fails in the above code. On
the other computer that's having problems, App A works fine in the above
code, but App B fails in that code. So, in the second case, with the same
computer and two identical sets of code, one set fails, the other doesn't.

I've looked at backup copies to see if it was a corruption issue, and
haven't seen any difference. And, as noted, this code has been in place for
years without problems, until just the other day when these problems started
happening.

All of the users have MS Office and the database application installed on
their C drives.

Any assistance would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Neil

[Neil Ginsberg]

Thanks for the note. I've had better success with opening new instances in
the past in other situations. Found some bizarre behavior when using
existing instances of Word. Either way, it happens with a clean boot.

Will let you know what happens.

Thanks,

Neil

"Geoff" <ge***@nospam.f or.me.com> wrote in message
news:bn******** **@newsg2.svr.p ol.co.uk...

Neil

Now that this thread has arrived on my machine and
notwithstanding Tom's lead in the other thread (which
perhaps offers more hope).

Word is (I believe) an application that likes to have only
one instance running - although I think I've got multiple
instances running from code before now for reasons
I've never got to the bottom of. Also, I've read some
incomprehensibl e stuff on memory not being released
when some object variables are set to Nothing after
they've been created using 'New' (even when no other
variables are pointing to the same object).

So, as you're using CreateObject, is there any mileage
in using the GetObject function first (to utilise any
running instance of Word, if Word prefers to be in
memory only once or simply to save system resources).
And, if GetObject produces error 429, then using
CreateObject?

I've seen two coding variations for the above, each of
which uses a boolean variable to leave Word running
if GetObject was successful, but quit Word if
CreateObject was successful. (I can post samples if
you want them.)

No doubt you're destroying object variables when
no longer needed by setting them to Nothing.

Presumably all Office/Windows service packs are
installed on the offending machine.

I realise this doesn't address your specific issue or
the bizarre nature of your code suddenly not
working - but HTH.

Like Tom, I'd be interested in your solution.

Regards
Geoff

[TC]

"Geoff" <ge***@nospam.f or.me.com> wrote in message
news:bn******** **@newsg2.svr.p ol.co.uk...

(snip)

Word is (I believe) an application that likes to have only
one instance running

Geoff, that's not really so. There is no problem having multiple instances
of Word running. In some cases, you might *prefer* to have a seperate
instance, to avoid disturbing whatever the user is doing "manually" with an
"existing" copy of Word.

HTH,
TC

[TC]

"rkc" <rk*@yabba.dabb a.do.rochester. rr.bomb> wrote in message
news:cv******** ***********@twi ster.nyroc.rr.c om...

"TC" <a@b.c.d> wrote in message news:1067486213 .516312@teuthos ...

I found a couple of posts about this error: both in German! Here's one,
translated by altavista:

<snip translation>

Ok, that was fun! Now let's try something else.

Cracked me up.

I particularly liked "NT 4.0 with service luggage 6a" !!

TC

[Tom Wickerath]

I guess I could have found the link to the KB article a lot easier, which I gave at the
end of my earlier reply, if I had only known how to search correctly! Go to the Microsoft
KB, and simply enter -2147023067 as the search term. You need to select either
Office 2003 or "All Microsoft Products" in the "Select a Microsoft Product" dropdown.

Note: You won't find anything if you select any of the following products:

Access 2000
Office 2000
Access 2002
Office XP
Access 2003

That's pretty amazing, considering that at the bottom of the article, one finds the
following:
The information in this article applies to:
a.. Microsoft Visual Basic Enterprise Edition for Windows 5.0
b.. Microsoft Visual Basic Enterprise Edition for Windows 6.0
c.. Microsoft Visual C++, 32-bit Professional Edition 5.0
d.. Microsoft Visual C++, 32-bit Professional Edition 6.0
e.. Microsoft Office 2003, All Editions
f.. Microsoft Office XP Developer
and I would have thought that Access 2002 is a part of Office XP, and that Access 2003 is
a part of Office 2003.

_______________ _______________ _______________ ________

"Tom Wickerath" <AO************ ***********@com cast.net> wrote in message
news:Ar******** ************@co mcast.com...

Here is a KB article that might be helpful:

INFO: Translating Large Office Automation Error Values
http://support.microsoft.com/default...roduct=acc2000

It includes a link to this KB article:
INFO: Translating Automation Errors for VB/VBA (Long)
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=186063
When I ran the MessageText function with the error number you reported, I get the
following result. Note: I had to change the scope of the function from Private to Public.

?MessageText(-2147023067)
Incompatible version of the RPC stub.

Hmmm....what does this helpful message mean? I conducted a search of the Knowledge Base
at:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;KBHOWTO

using the text returned by the MessageText function. I specified "All Microsoft Products"
and "Using: All of the words entered". I found 7 hits, one of which looks particularly
promising:

PRB: Office Automation Fails with an Incompatible RPC Stub Error
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;320108

I think you may find the answer in the above KB article!

Good Luck, and please report your findings back to the newsgroup.

Tom
_______________ _______________ _____________

"Neil Ginsberg" <nr*@nrgconsult .com> wrote in message
news:PU******** *********@newsr ead4.news.pas.e arthlink.net...

In my case, Err.Number = -2147023067 and vbObjectError = -2147221504.
Subtracting the second from the first I get 198437, which according to your
notes means it's a VBA error. I'm not sure where that gets me, since the VBA
code hasn't changed years and it started being problematic a couple of days
ago. Any ideas?

Thanks,

Neil
"Geoff" <ge***@nospam.f or.me.com> wrote in message
news:bn******** **@newsg1.svr.p ol.co.uk...

the user is getting an Automation Error.

Neil

I don't know if this might help pinpoint the problem.

Have you written an error handler to display the
automation error using the vbObjectError constant?

If you need it, the following information relates to the
vbObjectError constant:

1. Subtracting vbObjectError from Err.Number will
indicate the error as defined by the server application.

2. However, if subtracting vbObjectError from Err.Number
results in a number outside the range 0 - 65535, the
error is a VBA error.

Therefore, your error handler might look like:

' Remove the constant added by the server application:
MyError = Err.Number - vbObjectError

' Is the result in the range 0 - 65535?
If MyError > 0 and MyError < 65535 then

Msg = "The object you accessed assigned this number to " & _
"the error: " & MyError & ". The originator of " & _
"the error was: " & Err.Source & ". Press F1 to " & _
"see the originating applications' help topic."

Else ' It's a VBA error:

Msg = "This error " & Err.Number & " is a VBA error. " & _
"Press Help button or F1 for VBA Help topic on " & _
"this error."

End if

Msgbox Msg, , "Object Error", Err.Helpfile, Err.HelpContext
Obviously, this doesn't solve your problem, but it may
help you identify it.

HTH
Geoff

[Neil Ginsberg]

> and I would have thought that Access 2002 is a part of Office XP, and that
Access 2003 is

a part of Office 2003.

Remember: indexers are just poor slobs who have stared at too many
characters over too many cups of coffee for too many hours.

Neil

[Neil Ginsberg]

Here's an update on the situation.

You'll recall that there are two machines with problems, and two apps --
"App A" (the original) and "App B" (the pared-down version). One machine had
problems with automation with App A; the other machine worked with App A but
had automation issues with App B. No other machines had problems. At least
part of the puzzle has been resolved.

The user who was having trouble with App A had created a shortcut to Word on
her own, and, it turns out, she found an old copy of Word 97 on the server
and opened that instead of Word 2000. After that, the automation code in
Access didn't work (the reference was to Word 2000) -- though, for some
reason, it was able to open Word and create the reference, but wasn't able
to do anything with it. Once she stopped using that shortcut and began using
Word 2000 again, the problem went away.

So that takes care of that.

Regarding the second issue, as noted in my response to TC, it turns out that
I *did* have different code between App A and App B -- App A had been
changed a few months back, though I forgot about it. App A was using early
binding, and App B was using late binding. And, despite the literature,
early binding was working, but late binding wasn't. So I changed App B to
early binding to match App A, but it's still not working.

And that's where I'm at now.

Neil
All the news that's fit to print.
"Geoff" <ge***@nospam.f or.me.com> wrote in message
news:bn******** **@newsg2.svr.p ol.co.uk...

Neil

Now that this thread has arrived on my machine and
notwithstanding Tom's lead in the other thread (which
perhaps offers more hope).

Word is (I believe) an application that likes to have only
one instance running - although I think I've got multiple
instances running from code before now for reasons
I've never got to the bottom of. Also, I've read some
incomprehensibl e stuff on memory not being released
when some object variables are set to Nothing after
they've been created using 'New' (even when no other
variables are pointing to the same object).

So, as you're using CreateObject, is there any mileage
in using the GetObject function first (to utilise any
running instance of Word, if Word prefers to be in
memory only once or simply to save system resources).
And, if GetObject produces error 429, then using
CreateObject?

I've seen two coding variations for the above, each of
which uses a boolean variable to leave Word running
if GetObject was successful, but quit Word if
CreateObject was successful. (I can post samples if
you want them.)

No doubt you're destroying object variables when
no longer needed by setting them to Nothing.

Presumably all Office/Windows service packs are
installed on the offending machine.

I realise this doesn't address your specific issue or
the bizarre nature of your code suddenly not
working - but HTH.

Like Tom, I'd be interested in your solution.

Regards
Geoff

[Neil Ginsberg]

Here's a new twist. I just went into App B with the new early binding code
on the machine that's having problems (no other machine has problems), and
ran the code to open a Word doc. Interesting results. I get a message that
the specific document is locked by another user (the current user of that
machine) and I'm given the option of opening it Read Only, etc. I select
Read Only and the document opens in Word. I then go back to my app, and
there's the same Automation Error as before -- only, instead of it being on
the line that opens the Word doc, it's on the line:

objWord.visible = True

The Word instance was already visible, since I saw the document open. But
that line of code hadn't been executed.

Again, this is the same code that's running fine on other machines.
Interesting.

Neil

"Neil Ginsberg" <nr*@nrgconsult .com> wrote in message
news:hT******** **********@news read4.news.pas. earthlink.net.. .

Here's an update on the situation.

You'll recall that there are two machines with problems, and two apps --
"App A" (the original) and "App B" (the pared-down version). One machine had problems with automation with App A; the other machine worked with App A but had automation issues with App B. No other machines had problems. At least
part of the puzzle has been resolved.

The user who was having trouble with App A had created a shortcut to Word on her own, and, it turns out, she found an old copy of Word 97 on the server
and opened that instead of Word 2000. After that, the automation code in
Access didn't work (the reference was to Word 2000) -- though, for some
reason, it was able to open Word and create the reference, but wasn't able
to do anything with it. Once she stopped using that shortcut and began using Word 2000 again, the problem went away.

So that takes care of that.

Regarding the second issue, as noted in my response to TC, it turns out that I *did* have different code between App A and App B -- App A had been
changed a few months back, though I forgot about it. App A was using early
binding, and App B was using late binding. And, despite the literature,
early binding was working, but late binding wasn't. So I changed App B to
early binding to match App A, but it's still not working.

And that's where I'm at now.

Neil
All the news that's fit to print.
"Geoff" <ge***@nospam.f or.me.com> wrote in message
news:bn******** **@newsg2.svr.p ol.co.uk...

Neil

Now that this thread has arrived on my machine and
notwithstanding Tom's lead in the other thread (which
perhaps offers more hope).

Word is (I believe) an application that likes to have only
one instance running - although I think I've got multiple
instances running from code before now for reasons
I've never got to the bottom of. Also, I've read some
incomprehensibl e stuff on memory not being released
when some object variables are set to Nothing after
they've been created using 'New' (even when no other
variables are pointing to the same object).

So, as you're using CreateObject, is there any mileage
in using the GetObject function first (to utilise any
running instance of Word, if Word prefers to be in
memory only once or simply to save system resources).
And, if GetObject produces error 429, then using
CreateObject?

I've seen two coding variations for the above, each of
which uses a boolean variable to leave Word running
if GetObject was successful, but quit Word if
CreateObject was successful. (I can post samples if
you want them.)

No doubt you're destroying object variables when
no longer needed by setting them to Nothing.

Presumably all Office/Windows service packs are
installed on the offending machine.

I realise this doesn't address your specific issue or
the bizarre nature of your code suddenly not
working - but HTH.

Like Tom, I'd be interested in your solution.

Regards
Geoff

[Tom Wickerath]

Did you work as an "indexer" as your first job? <smile>

Also, have you been able to rule out the possibility of incorrect OLE Automation
system files? I was thinking that perhaps this particular PC does not have the
Windows XP operating system, but it had some other software installed, which may
have installed an incorrect version of the OLE Automation files intended for
Windows XP. That scenerio may have led to the automation error you reported for
your application....

_______________ _______________ _______

"Neil Ginsberg" <nr*@nrgconsult .com> wrote in message
news:D3******** *********@newsr ead3.news.pas.e arthlink.net...

and I would have thought that Access 2002 is a part of Office XP, and that
Access 2003 is a part of Office 2003.

Remember: indexers are just poor slobs who have stared at too many
characters over too many cups of coffee for too many hours.

Neil

[TC]

Keep us posted!

TC
"Neil Ginsberg" <nr*@nrgconsult .com> wrote in message
news:s0******** **********@news read4.news.pas. earthlink.net.. .

Here's a new twist. I just went into App B with the new early binding code
on the machine that's having problems (no other machine has problems), and
ran the code to open a Word doc. Interesting results. I get a message that
the specific document is locked by another user (the current user of that
machine) and I'm given the option of opening it Read Only, etc. I select
Read Only and the document opens in Word. I then go back to my app, and
there's the same Automation Error as before -- only, instead of it being on the line that opens the Word doc, it's on the line:

objWord.visible = True

The Word instance was already visible, since I saw the document open. But
that line of code hadn't been executed.

Again, this is the same code that's running fine on other machines.
Interesting.

Neil

"Neil Ginsberg" <nr*@nrgconsult .com> wrote in message
news:hT******** **********@news read4.news.pas. earthlink.net.. .

Here's an update on the situation.

You'll recall that there are two machines with problems, and two apps --
"App A" (the original) and "App B" (the pared-down version). One machine had

problems with automation with App A; the other machine worked with App A

but

had automation issues with App B. No other machines had problems. At least part of the puzzle has been resolved.

The user who was having trouble with App A had created a shortcut to Word on

her own, and, it turns out, she found an old copy of Word 97 on the

server and opened that instead of Word 2000. After that, the automation code in
Access didn't work (the reference was to Word 2000) -- though, for some
reason, it was able to open Word and create the reference, but wasn't able to do anything with it. Once she stopped using that shortcut and began

using

Word 2000 again, the problem went away.

So that takes care of that.

Regarding the second issue, as noted in my response to TC, it turns out

that

I *did* have different code between App A and App B -- App A had been
changed a few months back, though I forgot about it. App A was using early binding, and App B was using late binding. And, despite the literature,
early binding was working, but late binding wasn't. So I changed App B to early binding to match App A, but it's still not working.

And that's where I'm at now.

Neil
All the news that's fit to print.
"Geoff" <ge***@nospam.f or.me.com> wrote in message
news:bn******** **@newsg2.svr.p ol.co.uk...

Neil

Now that this thread has arrived on my machine and
notwithstanding Tom's lead in the other thread (which
perhaps offers more hope).

Word is (I believe) an application that likes to have only
one instance running - although I think I've got multiple
instances running from code before now for reasons
I've never got to the bottom of. Also, I've read some
incomprehensibl e stuff on memory not being released
when some object variables are set to Nothing after
they've been created using 'New' (even when no other
variables are pointing to the same object).

So, as you're using CreateObject, is there any mileage
in using the GetObject function first (to utilise any
running instance of Word, if Word prefers to be in
memory only once or simply to save system resources).
And, if GetObject produces error 429, then using
CreateObject?

I've seen two coding variations for the above, each of
which uses a boolean variable to leave Word running
if GetObject was successful, but quit Word if
CreateObject was successful. (I can post samples if
you want them.)

No doubt you're destroying object variables when
no longer needed by setting them to Nothing.

Presumably all Office/Windows service packs are
installed on the offending machine.

I realise this doesn't address your specific issue or
the bizarre nature of your code suddenly not
working - but HTH.

Like Tom, I'd be interested in your solution.

Regards
Geoff

[Geoff]

Thanks for the kick up the proverbial...

You've forced me to re-read about single-use and
multiple-use application classes.

I see that Word's application class is single-use (by
default) or multiple-use. This was the missing piece
of the jigsaw in my understanding of using 'New',
'CreateObject' and 'GetObject'.

This seems amazing now as I've been using these
commands successfully for some time.

Thanks again.
Geoff