A while back I posted a message re. using an ADP file with a SQL Server back
end as opposed to MDB file with linked tables, thinking that the ADP file
would be less problematic. The input I got was that the ADP would be just
as, if not more, problematic; that ADO is far more limited than DAO,
requiring a lot of workarounds; and that it would be better to stay with a
seasoned MDB file than to switch to an ADP.
The database in question was inherited by me from someone else who
implemented things in a less than ideal way, and he, himself, converted it
from an existing database in another application. The database needs to be
revamped, and we are looking to rebuild it from the ground up with
additional functionality. So now the question is not staying with a seasoned
MDB as opposed to a new ADP; but, rather, which would be better for working
with a SQL Server back end, an MDB or ADP file?
Obviously if we go with an MDB file we can reuse many of the DAO routines,
as appropriate. But the main concern here is performance: which one will
provide the better performance, better data access, fewer strange anomalies,
and so on. Development time isn't the main concern.
The database currently relies in part on DAO and in part on stored
procedures. Obviously moving more towards stored procedures would be better,
but there will probably still be a significant amount of code in the front
end.
Any thoughts re. MDB vs. ADP or anything else related to this would be
appreciated.
Thanks,
Neil
Nov 13 '05
25 2656
Steve Jorgensen wrote: On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:08:32 +1100, <Br@dley> wrote:
Steve Jorgensen wrote: On 18 Jan 2005 05:41:56 -0800, al*****@yahoo.c om wrote:
<snip>
The ADP looking behind your stored procedures and views also makes it hard to do things that work fine in an MDB such as using a view for security where the user has permissions granted via the view that they don't haveon the tables directly. If you know the issue and are -very- careful, you can work around this. This is in the category of ADPs trying to think for you and thus making it very hard to use what should be typical rule enforcement on the back-end.
I haven't had any problems implementing row level security (eg. a manager can only see the employee they manage as defined in a table). Can you elaborate what problems you encountered?
Br@dley
If you use the WITH VIEW METADATA option, then using views for security works, but only assumning there is only one table behind the view. If there is more than one table behind the veiw, then either no key fields are reported, or too many key fields are reported. The first case slows down the recordsets and ensures that they are not editable even if you have an INSTEAD OF trigger that should make it so. If too many key fields are reported, then rows can seem to disappear after editing. Either way, it's screwey.
The work-around is to use only single-table views for security, then make multi-table views that query from those views if necessary. This still thwarts any attempts to use INSTEAD OF triggers on the multi-table view because since that view does not have WITH VIEW METADATA, the ADP will go around it and try to update the single-table views directly.
Oh I agree it's a bit screwy... but I seemed to get it working for what
I needed... (after some hair pulling trying to work out what was going
on:)
Br@dley
Absolutely - Access has been an incredible tool, and still is.
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 05:53:08 GMT, "Larry Linson" <bo*****@localh ost.not>
wrote: Well, Steve... for a "nice little desktop database", Access has given us a "pretty good ride"... it was first released in October 1992, so it has lasted over 12 years, so far, and it's not nearly dead yet.
But, even if it were... 12 years is a significant lifetime for a software product.
(And, another thing, I made a good living just out of Access for most of those 12 years. That, too, is impressive for a "nice little desktop database". I am convinced it was so much better than expected that it surprised even its developers.)
Larry
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message news:cg******* *************** **********@4ax. com... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:25:13 -0600, "Larry Linson" <bo*****@local host.not> wrote:
>There seem to be indications that Jet isn't quite "rusting away" despiteit >having once been declared "in maintenance mode" -- it has been updatedsince >that declaration and Jet-ODBC-Server is now recommended over >ADP-ADODB-Server by knowledgeable Microsoft insiders. > >In fact, one poster in CDMA said that Microsoft had told him that ADP-ADO >was being "deprecated " in the next version. But I have not personallyseen >such a statement from Microsoft. > >The old crystal ball is cloudy, at best, but it's clear from whatMicrosoft >has publicly stated that there is going to be another release ofMicrosoft >Office and Access is going to be part of it. > > Larry Linson > Microsoft Access MVP
My concern is that since it seems clear that Access will lag the rest of MS Office in terms of implementation as a .NET base app, it will get increasingly orphaned by developers migrating from VB/VBA development as advances in the .NET UI technology simultaneously narrow the functionality gap with Access in terms of things like easy reporting and continuous bound forms.
If that is the trend, it might be better to be leading it than following it.
Thank you for the discussion about ADP because I was considering using it
but now realize that what I have is superior to both ADP and MDB's with
linked tables.
Think outside of the box. Linked tables across the network are bad, bad,
bad, bad.... So don't use them.
What is the fastest way to retrieve data using an Access MDB? A query pass
thru. Can you bind a form to a QPT? Yes. What happens if you try to update a
field in a form bound to a QPT? Hmm - not good - it's not updatable.
Let's see. Can you create a query (make table or append) that uses the QPT
as its source? Yes. Hmm. Now you have a way to get data from the backend to
a front-end local table very quickly. Can you bind a form to the local
table? Yes. What happens to the backend data when you update the front-end
table through the form? Nothing. That's not good. Oh but wait!
What if you delegate the AfterUpdate, AfterInsert, Delete and
AfterDelConfirm events to a common form handler that references a VB DLL
that repeats the updates, inserts and deletes to the backend? In the length
of time for the user to scroll from the updated row to the next row, the
backend is updated even though there is no link to the backend.
What you wind up with is a very very very fast 2 tier client server
solution. Access is used on the front end for programming and for managing
disconnected datasets (makes you think about ADO.NET). If your really
skillful, you can gracefully manage concurrency conflicts (hint: think
timestamps) and deal with autoincrement keys (stored procedures for inserts
that pass back @@IDENTITY). You could even create a reusable table driven
architecture that completely hides the complexity of the data marshalling.
Again, the discussions about ADP versus MDB's has been great -- particularly
the part about how ADP's manage connections.
Jim Rand
"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localh ost.not> wrote in message
news:8HHHd.122$ BL3.47@trnddc01 ... Well, Steve... for a "nice little desktop database", Access has given us a "pretty good ride"... it was first released in October 1992, so it has lasted over 12 years, so far, and it's not nearly dead yet.
But, even if it were... 12 years is a significant lifetime for a software product.
(And, another thing, I made a good living just out of Access for most of those 12 years. That, too, is impressive for a "nice little desktop database". I am convinced it was so much better than expected that it surprised even its developers.)
Larry
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message news:cg******** *************** *********@4ax.c om... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:25:13 -0600, "Larry Linson" <bo*****@localh ost.not> wrote:
There seem to be indications that Jet isn't quite "rusting away"
despite ithaving once been declared "in maintenance mode" -- it has been updated sincethat declaration and Jet-ODBC-Server is now recommended over ADP-ADODB-Server by knowledgeable Microsoft insiders.
In fact, one poster in CDMA said that Microsoft had told him that
ADP-ADOwas being "deprecated " in the next version. But I have not personally seensuch a statement from Microsoft.
The old crystal ball is cloudy, at best, but it's clear from what Microsofthas publicly stated that there is going to be another release of MicrosoftOffice and Access is going to be part of it.
Larry Linson Microsoft Access MVP
My concern is that since it seems clear that Access will lag the rest of MS Office in terms of implementation as a .NET base app, it will get increasingly orphaned by developers migrating from VB/VBA development as advances in the .NET UI technology simultaneously narrow the functionality gap with
Access in terms of things like easy reporting and continuous bound forms.
If that is the trend, it might be better to be leading it than following it.
Hello Neil:
You wrote in conference
comp.databases. ms-access,microsof t.public.access .adp.sqlserver, microsoft.publi c.access.odbccl ientsvr
on Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:38:50 GMT:
NG> Any thoughts re. MDB vs. ADP or anything else related to this would be
NG> appreciated.
You will write the best code in the environment where you are more
proficient.
If you are equally proficient in MDB and ADP, probably ADP is better because
it's closer to today's approach.
If you choose ADP, one word of advise will be this: avoid using ADO
directly. Don't force Access into using ADO; rather, have Access do the job
with its own means - make everything bound, no "manual" manipulations with
the data; and don't ever touch form.recordset.
Vadim Rapp
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:12:08 -0600, "Vadim Rapp" <vr@myrealbox.n ospam.com>
wrote: Hello Neil: You wrote in conference comp.databases .ms-access,microsof t.public.access .adp.sqlserver, microsoft.publi c.access.odbccl ientsvr on Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:38:50 GMT:
NG> Any thoughts re. MDB vs. ADP or anything else related to this would be NG> appreciated.
You will write the best code in the environment where you are more proficient.
If you are equally proficient in MDB and ADP, probably ADP is better because it's closer to today's approach.
If you choose ADP, one word of advise will be this: avoid using ADO directly. Don't force Access into using ADO; rather, have Access do the job with its own means - make everything bound, no "manual" manipulations with the data; and don't ever touch form.recordset.
Your 2 statements seem to contradict each other. You say to avoid using the
API, but you say to use ADO because it's closer to today's approach (I assume
you mean because it uses ADO by default).
I can't agree with that. If you mostly avoid the API, it's better to use the
more mature and reliable Access project type, and that's the MDB hands-down.
Furthermore, I often use ADO in MDB applications, so the MDB doesn't get in
the way on that score either.
Furthermore, I have had notoriously poor luck with ADPs usaing purely bound
data designs because so many things that are not a problem in MDBs are so
touchy in ADPs. I have to add more complexity and write more code to work
around these things, so ADPs certainly don't help facilitate the "everything
bound approach".
Vadim Rapp
Hello Steve:
You wrote in conference
comp.databases. ms-access,microsof t.public.access .adp.sqlserver, microsoft.publi c.access.odbccl ientsvr
on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:41:29 -0800:
SJ> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:12:08 -0600, "Vadim Rapp"
<vr@myrealbox.n ospam.com>
SJ> wrote:
SJ>> If you are equally proficient in MDB and ADP, probably ADP is better
SJ>> because it's closer to today's approach.
SJ>>
SJ>> If you choose ADP, one word of advise will be this: avoid using ADO
SJ>> directly. Don't force Access into using ADO; rather, have Access do
SJ>> the job with its own means - make everything bound, no "manual"
SJ>> manipulations with the data; and don't ever touch form.recordset.
SJ> Your 2 statements seem to contradict each other. You say to avoid
SJ> using the API, but you say to use ADO because it's closer to today's
SJ> approach (I assume you mean because it uses ADO by default).
Not at all. I did not even mention the word API, so I assume you meant ADO.
I say to use ADP because ADP is based on ADO, which is closer to today's
approach, also it's more "direct" way to work with sql server. But not to
use ADO directly. Use Access/ADP methods, and Access will use ADO as it
wants to.
SJ> Furthermore, I have had notoriously poor luck with ADPs usaing purely
SJ> bound data designs because so many things that are not a problem in
SJ> MDBs are so touchy in ADPs.
As I wrote, the key to success is using one tool that you are most
proficient with. If you are using two very related API's, you are doomed for
the problems, because you can't avoid applying one approach to another API.
I bet that if you started using _only_ ADP, without even touching MDB, in
several weeks you would suddenly find that you and Access have adjusted to
each other, and the problems mysteriously dissolved. Your sub-conscience
would learn to choose the good (for the ADP) methods and avoid the bad ones.
And then in several more weeks, given the opportunity, you would find that
so many things that are not a problem in ADPs are so touchy in MDBs.
Vadim
ADPs are ready for primetime.
but they're difficult to implement, especially things like this:
1) forms against views is difficult/unpredictable
2) stored procs bind well to form, but it isn't very well documented
3) sql server doesn't have a crosstab query (yet)
hth
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message
news:sf******** *************** *********@4ax.c om... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:38:50 GMT, "Neil Ginsberg" <nr*@nrgconsult .com>
wrote:A while back I posted a message re. using an ADP file with a SQL Server
backend as opposed to MDB file with linked tables, thinking that the ADP file would be less problematic. The input I got was that the ADP would be just as, if not more, problematic; that ADO is far more limited than DAO, requiring a lot of workarounds; and that it would be better to stay with
aseasoned MDB file than to switch to an ADP.
The database in question was inherited by me from someone else who implemented things in a less than ideal way, and he, himself, converted
itfrom an existing database in another application. The database needs to
berevamped, and we are looking to rebuild it from the ground up with additional functionality. So now the question is not staying with a
seasonedMDB as opposed to a new ADP; but, rather, which would be better for
workingwith a SQL Server back end, an MDB or ADP file?
Obviously if we go with an MDB file we can reuse many of the DAO
routines,as appropriate. But the main concern here is performance: which one will provide the better performance, better data access, fewer strange
anomalies,and so on. Development time isn't the main concern. It's not just the develompment time, it's the unpredictabilit y of runtime behavior. It's just fastly harder to deliver verifiably high quality code with ADPs. They're too much of a hodge podge of hastily patched together kludges. ADPs and ADO also introduce at least as many performance
bottlenecks as performance improvments, and well-designed MDB client/server apps have
been known to perform really well.
The database currently relies in part on DAO and in part on stored procedures. Obviously moving more towards stored procedures would be
better,but there will probably still be a significant amount of code in the
frontend. That's obvious, but not necessarily correct. Access works quite well
using forms bound to DAO recordsets on linked tables. if you deviate from that,
you might as well scrap Access altogether and implement custom GUIs in
something like C# or Java - of course, that might really be your best answer if time
is not an issue.
With respect to stored procedures performing universally better than
Access queries of linked tables, it's simply not the case. In most cases, an
Access query generates a prepared statement on the server side which functions
much like a stored procedure would. When the server sees the same prepared statement signature again later on, it will realize it can use the same
query plan it computed for the statement previously - just like a stored
procedurem only without the headaches of being unable to update via an Access bound
form.Any thoughts re. MDB vs. ADP or anything else related to this would be appreciated. It's easier to get higher reliability and good performance with an MDB
than an ADP - period. If time is not an issue, scrap Access altogether and write hand-optimized code in a "real" programming language.
MDB is dead.
ADP is alive and well.
ADP reports SLAUGHTER crystal reports in usability.
ADP is an awesome platform for data entry
<ly******@yahoo .com> wrote in message
news:11******** **************@ f14g2000cwb.goo glegroups.com.. . Neil Ginsberg wrote: Any thoughts re. MDB vs. ADP or anything else related to this would be appreciated.
If you bind your forms then your users must have SQL table permissions. If they have table permissions what is to prevent them from using these permissions directly on the table, in your database or another? One can prevent this by using application roles. Unfortunately ADPs and application roles combined are a cruel joke, because ADPs have various connections for various interfaces and one cannot predict what connection will be used where. And if you don't bind your forms why use Access, ... for its limited forms, its bizarre idiosyncracies, its memory glut, its archaic scripting language? Maybe for its reports? MAYBE!
Access is dead. It's fine with JET; but JET has been retired and is rusting out slowly on one of those big California desert airfields. As a front end for other db engines it's a joke, a bad joke.
What are those lines from "Red Rubber Ball"? "I bought my ticket with my tears, That's all I'm gonna spend."
views are a pain to update
so basically use base tables
and get this
1) only load a single record at a time and this should cut down on
complexity
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message
news:n8******** *************** *********@4ax.c om... On 18 Jan 2005 05:41:56 -0800, al*****@yahoo.c om wrote:
Steve Jorgensen wrote: It's not just the develompment time, it's the unpredictabilit y ofruntime behavior. [snip] It's easier to get higher reliability and good performance with an MDB than an ADP - period.
Steve,
What are the issues you're talking about here? Or can you point me to a link that talks about some of them (if they've been discussed extensively) ? I haven't been around the CDMA 'hood for a while; I know there are plenty of people who argue, and I agree with them, that learning ADO because it's new doesn't make any sense, but I don't remember reading much that talks about ADPs being inherintly more prone to falling over at run time, or inherintly requiring more development time (other than learning ADO).
This is in no way a troll or a challenge. I've been working on a project that uses a MS SQL Server back end and an ADP front for the last seven months, and I've run into very few things that I hadn't seen in an MDB. Or at least that's my impression--maybe I'm just seeing trees, though.
Well, for one thing, ADPs have a habit of making certain multi-table
queries uneditable. The first version of a query may be editable, but after some random and seemingly trivial change in the query itself or afger the next Access service pack or MDAC upgrade, it becomes uneditable again, and the tweaking process starts all over again. I've finally gotten to the point where I don't even try to use multi-table queries on bound forms in an
ADP. Either, I use combo boxes as lookups for data in related tables (uh yeah, that'll help performance), or have to use separate forms for
adding/editing which is more clicks and work hassle for the user as well as more
duplication of form design elements.
For another thing, there is a bug that was supposedly fixed, but actually isn't in which sometimes an ORDER BY clause in a subform or subreport
causes an error. To fix it, it is necessary to remove the table name qualifier
from the expression in the ORDER BY clause. Of course, the query builder
always puts the table qualifiers on, and it's never obvious what's broken without some digging.
In ADPs, any time you do anything slightly out of the ordinary in a server-side query, the ADP gets confused. For instance, in my MDBs,
sometimes I like to have a view that references a table in another database on the server. I do this, for instance, to put tables frequently used to hold temporary data in a database with TRUNCATE LOG ON CHECKPOINT so my backups aren't filled mostly with irrelevant adding and deleting of temporary
data. When you try to bind an ADP to this, it gets really confused beacause ADO
is smart enough to try to look at the underlying tables, but not smart enough
to look at them in another database on the server.
The ADP looking behind your stored procedures and views also makes it hard
to do things that work fine in an MDB such as using a view for security where
the user has permissions granted via the view that they don't haveon the
tables directly. If you know the issue and are -very- careful, you can work
around this. This is in the category of ADPs trying to think for you and thus
making it very hard to use what should be typical rule enforcement on the
back-end. I can't remember all the other issues right now, but I remember that there
are several more.
i believe that i am the person that made the depecrated statement... not
sure
ADP rocks.
Microsoft isn't taking this platform seriously; and they need to.
The bugginess of ADP is probably holding up a LOT of SQL Server sales, I
would assume.
"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localh ost.not> wrote in message
news:#U******** ******@tk2msftn gp13.phx.gbl... There seem to be indications that Jet isn't quite "rusting away" despite
it having once been declared "in maintenance mode" -- it has been updated
since that declaration and Jet-ODBC-Server is now recommended over ADP-ADODB-Server by knowledgeable Microsoft insiders.
In fact, one poster in CDMA said that Microsoft had told him that ADP-ADO was being "deprecated " in the next version. But I have not personally seen such a statement from Microsoft.
The old crystal ball is cloudy, at best, but it's clear from what
Microsoft has publicly stated that there is going to be another release of Microsoft Office and Access is going to be part of it.
Larry Linson Microsoft Access MVP
<ly******@yahoo .com> wrote in message news:11******** **************@ f14g2000cwb.goo glegroups.com.. . Neil Ginsberg wrote: Any thoughts re. MDB vs. ADP or anything else related to this would be appreciated.
If you bind your forms then your users must have SQL table permissions. If they have table permissions what is to prevent them from using these permissions directly on the table, in your database or another? One can prevent this by using application roles. Unfortunately ADPs and application roles combined are a cruel joke, because ADPs have various connections for various interfaces and one cannot predict what connection will be used where. And if you don't bind your forms why use Access, ... for its limited forms, its bizarre idiosyncracies, its memory glut, its archaic scripting language? Maybe for its reports? MAYBE!
Access is dead. It's fine with JET; but JET has been retired and is rusting out slowly on one of those big California desert airfields. As a front end for other db engines it's a joke, a bad joke.
What are those lines from "Red Rubber Ball"? "I bought my ticket with my tears, That's all I'm gonna spend."
This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics |
by: Dag |
last post by:
Is there a python module that includes functions for working with prime
numbers? I mainly need A function that returns the Nth prime number and
that returns how many prime numbers are less than N, but a prime number
tester would also be nice. I'm dealing with numbers in the 10^6-10^8 range
so it would have to fairly efficient
Dag
|
by: Greg Brunet |
last post by:
In doing some testing of different but simple algorithms for getting a
list of prime numbers, I ended up getting some results that seem a bit
contradictory. Given the following test program (testPrimes.py) with
two algorithms that both check for primes by testing only odd numbers
using factors up to the square root of the value, where Primes1 is based
on all of the existing primes so far, and Primes2 is based on all odd
numbers, I would...
|
by: AshifToday |
last post by:
this was my and my frineds little project in earlier classes,
the program seperates the composite and prime numbers in two sections
of the screen
=====================
/*
This program has been made by A & A Group.
Muhammad Ali: Roll # 1462 Class A-2 , B.Sc.(Hons.) in C.S.
|
by: CMM |
last post by:
I am so disappointed in VS2005. The "little things" wrong with it are just
mind-boggling. Boy, I'll be so mad if I have to wait a year for the ".1"
release that fixes all the bugs in this obvious beta product.
This (received today) is just one of the many examples of why ASP.NET 2.0
was totally not ready for prime time.
http://www.kbalertz.com/Feedback_911717.aspx The "workaround" they cite
isn't a workaround AT ALL. They're actually...
|
by: Joel Mayes |
last post by:
Hi All;
I'm teaching myself C, and have written a prime number generator. It is
a pretty inefficient implementation of the Sieve of Eratosthenes to
calculate primes up to 1,000,000. If anyone has time to critic and offer
my some feedback I'd be grateful
Thanks
Joel
| |
by: zacariaz |
last post by:
Once again i have tryed my lyck with classes and it seem that im
getting the hang of it, but before i get too self confident, i would
like to get an expert oppinion.
I have made a working primeclass, it isnt finished, but it should show
if im making any major mistakes and errors.
@code start:
#include <vector>
|
by: rhle.freak |
last post by:
Here is my code to generate prime numbers.It works absolutely fine when
the range is
*not very large*. However on initializing i with a large integer it
produces erroneous results
(some numbers ending in 5 ..which obviously cannot be prime numbers)
can anyone please help me out with the reason??
/*Generate Prime Numbers*/
#include<stdio.h>
|
by: newstips6706 |
last post by:
1, 2, 3, 5, 7... PRIME Numbers
________________________________
Definitions
What is a PRIME Number ?
|
by: Ron Garret |
last post by:
The wsgiref module in Python 2.5 seems to be empty:
$ python
Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Mar 1 2007, 10:09:05)
on darwin
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
So... is wsgi considered ready for production use, or is it still on the
bleeding edge? And if the former, which implementation should one use?
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
| |
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
|
by: conductexam |
last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one.
At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image.
Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
| |
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...
| |