I have a SQL Server Express database. The problem is when I enter data into table I get this message:
This row was successfully committed to the database.
However, a problem occurred when attempting to retrieve the data back after the commit.
Because of this, the displayed data in this row is read-only.
To fix this problem, please re-run the query
So my data is committed, but it is read-only. Once I reopen my table it is not read-only anymore and I can alter it.
Now, I found that this has to do with fields that have default value defined, and it turns out it is true. I have a field with default value, and if I fill it manually than this problem doesn't occur. But I did not find how to solve this problem without having to fill the field manually, cause I want my field to be filled automatically with the defined default value.
Related
I have an MS-Access front end to a MSSQL server back end. The existing, functional updates that the tool makes are applied through a MSSQL view which is inserted to MS-Access as a linked table. There is a primary key defined for this linked 'table' (view).
The user sees a subset of records that match previously selected criteria, and uses comboboxes (unbound) to select the value of several fields that are then applied to all matching records using DoCmd.RunSQL with Me.Filter on the "After Update" Event.
Users have requested an additional piece of functionality.
I have:
Added the new column required to the underlying table referenced in the view
Added the column to be output in the view
Refreshed the linked table in MS-Access
Added the new field to the form that will be updating it, and modified the DoCmd.RunSQL statement to enact the UPDATE
When updating the new field via the form, I get the standard message "You are about to change x rows" where x is the appropriate number. Pressing OK gives no errors, but the table is not updated.
To debug, I attempted to change the record in the linked table view directly. Again no errors were thrown, and the row seems to be updated, but this is not reflected in SSMS, and reloading the table in MS-Access the change is no longer present. I can change the values of columns other than the new one.
I also tested adding the underlying table as a linked table and I can edit the rows in MS-Access in this table.
(Update)
At #ErikvonAsmuth suggestion below I tried using Recordsets on the bound form instead of the DoCmd.RunSQL. Again could access the record and an update gave no error on rst.Update, but the change is not reflected in the database for the new field. I can change a previously existing field using this method as above.
Seems my problem is independent of the update method.
(/Update)
I would appreciate any ideas for next steps to check.
I found the issue.
There was a trigger defined on the view to handle saving to the table. I altered this in SSQL to add the new column and everything is working now.
Found a hint when I tried to edit the field in SSMS and it wouldn't work there either - was getting a Row failed to retrieve on last operation error.
That lead me to a thread referencing triggers on ExpertsExchange
I will be going back and changing the DoCMD.RunSQL statements to use recordsets.
I have an SSIS project that I'm using to automate pulling CRM data into a SQL Server Database using Kingswaysoft. These SSIS packages are autogenerated, so my solution to this issue needs to be compatible with that.
The description field on Contact in CRM is a nvarchar(2000), but this CRM org still has old data, and some of those old contact records have a description longer than 2000 characters. When I try to pull those using Kingsway, I get this error:
Error: 0xC002F304 at Stage Data for contact, Export contact Data [2]: An error occurred with the following error message: "The input value for 'description' field (or one of its related fields) does not fit into the output buffer, please consider increasing the output column's Length property or changing its data type to one that can accommodate more data such as ntext (DT_NTEXT). This change can be done using the component's Advanced Editor window.".
This makes sense, since I'm pulling a column longer than specified in the metadata, but the problem is that I want to ignore this error, truncate the column, and continue the data load. Obviously I could set the column to DT_NTEXT and not worry about it, but since these packages are autogenerated I have no way of knowing beforehand which columns have old data and which don't, so I won't know which should be DT_NTEXT.
So is there a way to make Kingswaysoft truncate input data which is longer than what's specified in the metadata?
Thank you for choosing KingswaySoft as your integration solution. For this situation, unfortunately there is no way to make that work without making those changes in the component’s Advanced Editor.
If the source component just simply ignores the error and truncates the value, you will lose some of your data and thus affect the data integrity during the integration. Therefore, you may need to change the data type to DT_NTEXT or increase the length of this field in order to handle this situation properly. Alternatively, you can try to change the field length on your CRM side so that the SSIS package can be generated correctly.
We have data stored in encrypted fields (with SQL Server encryption) in our database and we have a requirement to be able to remove certain records from our database under certain peculiar conditions that I will spare you. However it has been noted by a DBA that simply nulling out the data potentially still leaves residual data in the file so it could potentially be recovered.
It has been suggested by someone in the team that (rather than nulling) we write a '*' for each character we want to remove then delete the record, and they assert that this will wipe the data so if someone gets hold of the mdf file the value won't be retrievable (because the bits have been overwritten). For example if we have a value "abc" we run an update statement that replaces this value with '***'. Then we delete the record.
Can anyone confirm if this is the case? Personally I'm skeptical, but I'm a developer and not a DBA so this isn't an area of specialty for me.
In my Access application's data entry form I'm using Me.Refresh to show the user the new value of a calculated field based on data they entered in a non-calculated field. The purpose is to give them the deadline for doing a job next.
This Access app is using linked SQL Server 2012 tables via ODBC. The calculated field is in the underlying SQL Server table, not part of the Access Record Source query because I want to store the calculated value in the actual data, not just as an interface element.
The calculation is very simple:
nextjob = jobdate + 79
So I have the field for jobdate set to run Me.Refresh after update. All well and good.
The problem is that if the user updates jobdate, triggers the refresh by moving to another field, then returns to the jobdate field and changes the date they entered Access throws a "The data has been changed by another user" error.
I tested the method using native Access tables and the problem does not occur. However the data needs to stay on the server, so moving to native tables is not a solution for me.
There are several possible solutions.
1- If it's always jobdate + 79, don't store it at all, use a view that has the calculated field.
2- Use Me.Requery instead of Me.Refresh. If the form shows multiple records, you must navigate back to the current record, you can use Me.Bookmark for that.
3- Move the calculation into the Access frontend - make nextjob an ordinary column and set it in the form, so it isn't another user (the server) that updates the data.
I am getting the following error in an MS Access ADP when trying to add a record on a form linked to a MS SQL Server 2000 table:
Run-time error '31004':
The value of an (AutoNumber) field
cannot be retrived prior to being
saved.
Please save the record that contains
the (AutoNumber) field prior to
performing this action.
note: retrieved is actually spelled wrong in the error.
Does anyone know what this means?
I've done a web search and was only able to find the answer at a certain site that only experts have access to.
First of all, if you are going to look at experts-exchange - do it in FireFox, you'll see the unblocked answers at the bottom of the page.
Second, do you have a subform on that form that's using the autonumber/key field on the master form? Do you require the data that's on that subform to be saved (i.e., having its own key) before the main form is saved. You could be into a deadlock of A and B requiring each other to be saved first.
Other than that, you must somehow be accessing that autonumber field whenyou are saving it. The best I can suggest is to step through the code line by line.
Are you trying to assign the value of an Identity field to a variable or something else before you have saved the record?
For whatever reason, your app is trying to read the value of the identity field before the record has been saved, which is what generates that identity field. In other words, no value exists for the Autonumber field until the row is saved.
I think we'd need to see more code or know more about the steps that lead up to this error to resolve it in more detail.
You should have add some lines of code to show us how you're managing your data and what you are doing exactly. But I am suspecting an issue related to a recordset update. can you identify when the autonumber value is created? Is it available in a control on a form? Can you add a control to display this value to check how it is generated when adding a new record? Is the underlying recordset properly updated? Can you add something like me.recordset.update on some form events: I would try the OnCurrent one ...