Yes, that is what you should see happening. Another way of thinking of Referential
Integrity (RI) is simply "no orphans", as in no orphan records allowed. For example, if
you have a table of Customers and Orders (see the Northwind.mdb sample database) and you
edit a customer's primary key, your change will be "cascaded" to all related tables in
order to maintain RI. Without RI enforced, you could easily end up with records in the
Orders table that had no known customer. Not a good situation.
________________________________________
"Omey Samaroo" <no****@replytogroup.com> wrote in message
news:Jh********************@news04.bloor.is.net.ca ble.rogers.com...
thanks Tom, does this mean that if I change the Employee_Number in the
primary key field that it will change the Employee_Number in all the
referenced tables if Cascade Update is checked on?
________________________________________
"Tom Wickerath" <AOS168RemoveThisSpamBlockmcast.net> wrote in message
news:g9********************@comcast.com...
Would referential integrity have anything to do with this ?
Yes it would. You need to have referential integrity checked and include Cascade Update
Related Fields checked as well.
However, a well chosen primary key should never *need* to be changed. Just a design
concern that you might want to consider in the future.
______________________________________
"Omey Samaroo" <no****@replytogroup.com> wrote in message
news:Nn*******************@news04.bloor.is.net.cab le.rogers.com...
I am using Employee_Number as a primary field in one table and in another
table I have a field with the same name that it references in a one to many
relationship. How do I change the primary field and update all the secondary
fields at the same time ?
Would referential integrity have anything to do with this ?
Any help is appreciated,
Thanks
Omey