By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
443,560 Members | 1,093 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 443,560 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

RunSQL vs Execute rehashed

P: n/a
All,

A month or so ago I started a thread titled "I was *forced* to use RunSQL."

At that time, I said I'd get back to you after trying the dbSeeChanges constant
in the Execute method. I was very confident that it was going to solve the
problem.

It didn't. I've resigned myself to using RunSQL instead of dbs.Execute in this
context...first time ever. The bottom line from the JET lovers in here is that
my code is messed up somewhere (understandably). Of course, I'm blaming JET!
:)

I'm not going to post the entire module in this newsgroup, but if someone
really wants to see ALL of the code in context, send me email to the address in
here, and I'll be happy to send a response email with module text intact.
Otherwise, I consider the issue dead.
Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
3 Replies


P: n/a
You could of course explain what is the problem you are having (most often
due to the fact that the Jet Expression Service exists for RunSQL but not
for Database.Execute, which allows you to have expressions using form
controls and such), but occasionally there are the concurrency issues that
are assisted by things like the dbSeeChanges constant.

But if you post a generic message like this one that has no actual content
other than a pointer to an old thread and an announcement that the issue is
dead for you, then it is unclear how you expect people to respond?

--
MichKa [MS]
NLS Collation/Locale/Keyboard Development
Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies

This posting is provided "AS IS" with
no warranties, and confers no rights.
"DCM Fan" <dc****@aol.comSPNOAM> wrote in message
news:20***************************@mb-m20.aol.com...
All,

A month or so ago I started a thread titled "I was *forced* to use RunSQL."
At that time, I said I'd get back to you after trying the dbSeeChanges constant in the Execute method. I was very confident that it was going to solve the
problem.

It didn't. I've resigned myself to using RunSQL instead of dbs.Execute in this context...first time ever. The bottom line from the JET lovers in here is that my code is messed up somewhere (understandably). Of course, I'm blaming JET! :)

I'm not going to post the entire module in this newsgroup, but if someone
really wants to see ALL of the code in context, send me email to the address in here, and I'll be happy to send a response email with module text intact.
Otherwise, I consider the issue dead.

Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 08:24:27 -0700, "Michael \(michka\) Kaplan [MS]"
<mi*****@online.microsoft.com> wrote:
You could of course explain what is the problem you are having (most often
due to the fact that the Jet Expression Service exists for RunSQL but not
for Database.Execute, which allows you to have expressions using form
controls and such), but occasionally there are the concurrency issues that
are assisted by things like the dbSeeChanges constant.

But if you post a generic message like this one that has no actual content
other than a pointer to an old thread and an announcement that the issue is
dead for you, then it is unclear how you expect people to respond?


I think the point of the post was to see if anyone would review a copy of the
entire set of code, sent by e-mail because he's tried everything short of that
with no success.
Nov 13 '05 #3

P: n/a
<<then it is unclear how you expect people to respond?>>

Since I consider the issue dead, I don't care if anyone responds. I was very
clear in the original posts on the subjects, and I don't care to rehash them
again...so I made sure to include the precise title, allowing the curious to
look it up.

At the end of the original thread I said I'd get back to the NG about my
findings, so I was honoring that promise with this new message, and giving the
readers "control" by having them email me if they wish to persue any further.

That's all, folks!
Nov 13 '05 #4

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.