By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
446,392 Members | 1,576 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 446,392 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Multiple Instances Of A Report: Fighting Nature?

P: n/a
I have a situation where a bunch of statistics are being presented based on a
mutual fund and a benchmark fund's monthly and quarterly returns for a given
period (like 10 years....)

The hitch is that all bets are off if all four return streams are not complete
and contiguous. In that case, however, the user needs to know which fund(s)
have returns missing for which dates so they can backfill them.

I started out with a single report and a single work table - trying to open 4
instances of the report on-the-fly.

But MS Access crashed so often and response time was so slow and I didn't want
to be eating up the client's budget on a futile quest.... So I wimped out -
cloned the original report 3 times and created four separate work tables.

Runs in a flash, and nobody'll ever know.... But did I do the right thing?
Are there problems lurking behind multiple instances of the same report or were
me and my PC just having a bad day?
I've played around with multiple instances of a form with no apparent
problems... But reports just weren't happening...
--
PeteCresswell
Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
2 Replies


P: n/a
Pete,
I'd relax. It sounds like you found something that worked given the time
and budget available. With more time & money I'd lean toward attempting
four different views for each report instance and perhaps a SELECT . . .
UNION statment to stack the results from the four into one set of rows. If
there needs to be a value in each of sixteen columns (12 for each month plus
four for the quarterly returns) then I'd use something like
NZ(MONTH_VALUE,"Nothing") to fill the months for one of the four with
something so I knew where I had missing data.

This sounds like a two step process, though. Step 1 is a view which helps
identify missing data and Step 2 is another view that presents the validated
result. If I am correct in assuming that this contributes to some sort of
numerical analysis then the Step 2 view would have to use NZ(MONTH_VALUE,0)
instead of NZ(MONTH_VALUE,"Nothing") so as to not screw up the math on these
columns.
Time to put down the beer and go get my friend at the aiport. Post a reply
here if I can be of more help. (Maybe after I recover from my present
altered state of mind).
--
Alan Webb
kn*******@SPAMhotmail.com
"It's not IT, it's IS"

"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid> wrote in message
news:mb********************************@4ax.com...
I have a situation where a bunch of statistics are being presented based on
a
mutual fund and a benchmark fund's monthly and quarterly returns for a
given
period (like 10 years....)

The hitch is that all bets are off if all four return streams are not
complete
and contiguous. In that case, however, the user needs to know which
fund(s)
have returns missing for which dates so they can backfill them.

I started out with a single report and a single work table - trying to
open 4
instances of the report on-the-fly.

But MS Access crashed so often and response time was so slow and I didn't
want
to be eating up the client's budget on a futile quest.... So I wimped
out -
cloned the original report 3 times and created four separate work tables.

Runs in a flash, and nobody'll ever know.... But did I do the right
thing?
Are there problems lurking behind multiple instances of the same report or
were
me and my PC just having a bad day?
I've played around with multiple instances of a form with no apparent
problems... But reports just weren't happening...
--
PeteCresswell

Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
Per Alan Webb:
perhaps a SELECT . . .
UNION statment to stack the results from the four into one set of row


Bingo!..... Dunno why I don't think of these things right off the bat...

I'll stick with the four work tables and union them into a single report broken
on a variable whose value is unique to each component of the union.
--
PeteCresswell
Nov 13 '05 #3

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.