By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,679 Members | 2,749 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,679 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Error - Field cannot be updated

P: n/a
FRONT END: ACCESS 2000 SP3
BACK END: SQL SERVER 2000

I have been making some modifications to the front end, and a
completely unrelated error has occurred. It is unrelated, because the
changes I have made have been to neither the form, nor the underlying
query, nor to the underlying tables.

I have a subform in Datasheet view based on the SQL below. Yesterday,
when the user tried to add a new record to the subform, he had a dialog
with the error "Field cannot be updated". However, with exactly the
same code and a snapshot of the database, I can add records ad
infinitum here. I have tried adding records to my copy of the raw
query (below) in the Access Query builder and that works fine as well.
It means a visit off-site to check my client's code, which I don't want
to do unless I have some ideas to check.

So, you wonderful genii, does anyone have any hints? I have tried
recreating the database, assuming it's corrupted, by importing all the
objects into a vanilla DB, but that didn't solve it.

Thanks

Edward

SELECT dbo_tblPrinter.fldPrinter, dbo_tblPrinterJobs.fldPrinterOrderID,
dbo_tblPrinterOrder.fldStatus, dbo_tblPrinterOrder.fldDateRequired,
dbo_tblPrinterOrder.fldDateReceived, dbo_tblPrinterJobs.fldJobID,
dbo_tblJobs.fldDocumentNumber, dbo_tblJobs.fldRevision,
dbo_tblJobs.fldDateCreated, dbo_tblJobs.fldDateClosed,
dbo_tblJobs.fldNumPages, dbo_tblJobs.fldSingleFoldouts,
dbo_tblJobs.fldDoubleFoldouts
FROM dbo_tblPrinter INNER JOIN (dbo_tblJobs INNER JOIN
(dbo_tblPrinterOrder INNER JOIN dbo_tblPrinterJobs ON
dbo_tblPrinterOrder.fldPrinterOrderID =
dbo_tblPrinterJobs.fldPrinterOrderID) ON dbo_tblJobs.fldJobID =
dbo_tblPrinterJobs.fldJobID) ON dbo_tblPrinter.fldPrinterID =
dbo_tblPrinterOrder.fldPrinterID
WHERE (((dbo_tblPrinterOrder.fldStatus)<>4))
ORDER BY dbo_tblPrinterJobs.fldPrinterOrderID,
dbo_tblPrinterJobs.fldJobID;

Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
1 Reply


P: n/a
te********@hotmail.com wrote in message news:<11**********************@o13g2000cwo.googleg roups.com>...
FRONT END: ACCESS 2000 SP3
BACK END: SQL SERVER 2000

I have been making some modifications to the front end, and a
completely unrelated error has occurred. It is unrelated, because the
changes I have made have been to neither the form, nor the underlying
query, nor to the underlying tables.

[snip]

The deafening silence from you learned guys, and my colleagues'
bafflement meant that I had to pay the client a visit. Guess what?
When I pitched up, it worked as expected. We had a little chat. It
turns out that his experience was slightly different than he had
explained on the phone. He could add 1 record to the subform, but the
error "Field cannot be updated" was shown if he tried to add a second
record. His way round it was to close down the front end, restart the
application, and add another record.

This got me thinking. I happen to know that the network at this site
(by the way, it is the Customer Services Division of a major,
multinational aerospace company employing several thousand people) is
pretty flaky. One task that my client has to do from time to time is
copy relatively large .PDF files across the network. For a 45Mb file
this can take anything up to one hour!

So, I am wondering whether the lock release is being caught in some
bottleneck, and the application cannot then operate on the subform
recordset for a second operation until the lock is released. This is
effected by "brute force" when the user closes down the application
and restarts it.

Does this sound like a plausible scenario?

Yours with fingers crossed.

Edward
--
The reading group's reading group:
http://www.bookgroup.org.uk
--
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a
habit - Aristotle

Those heights by great men reached and kept
Were not obtained by sudden flight,
But they, while their companions slept
Were toiling upward in the night
- Longfellow
Nov 13 '05 #2

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.