VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem
| Author |
Message |
|
Steve Lac
#1 / 6
|
 VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem Greetings,
I have a problem with the Access 2 compatibilty layer for VB3. I
have a number of databases out in the field which are using access 1.1
format, but I recently installed the compatibility layer so I now only
use access 2 version databases. (I know I'm slow to change, its just an
old 'wont use the latest version' habit !)
Each of my database users has a utility to compact and repair
his database. It has been necessary to add a new facility to this
utility for an old customer who still has only access 1.1 files, but I
cant seem to stop the compact function from converting to v2 files, Ive
tried using the DB_VERSION10 option in the compactdatabase line but it
just seems to ignore it ,
eg. CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", DB_VERSION10
also CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", 1
Neither seems to work.
Thanks in advance for any help
--
Steve Lacy
JSL Systems
|
| Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
 |
|
Geoff Whi
#2 / 6
|
VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem Quote:
> I have a problem with the Access 2 compatibilty layer for VB3. I
>have a number of databases out in the field which are using access 1.1
>format, but I recently installed the compatibility layer so I now only
>use access 2 version databases.
What seems to be the problem? Quote: > Each of my database users has a utility to compact and repair
>his database. It has been necessary to add a new facility to this
>utility for an old customer who still has only access 1.1 files, but I
>cant seem to stop the compact function from converting to v2 files, Ive
>tried using the DB_VERSION10 option in the compactdatabase line but it
>just seems to ignore it ,
Why is it a problem for the user to be converted to the Access version 2.0 database format? What problem happens after the DB is converted? Quote: >eg. CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", DB_VERSION10
>also CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", 1
>Neither seems to work.
Once the compatability layer is installed, I believe that the meaning of the DB_VERSION10 constant is changed-- i.e. the new meaning is that "version10" now means 1.1. Look in the release notes that came with the compatability layer, I believe this is noted there. I would still want to know what kind of problem is caused
by converting VB3 application users from the Access 1.1 to
the Access 2.0 database format. I think I may have a
reason to need to do that!
|
| Fri, 29 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Geoff Whi
#3 / 6
|
VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem Quote:
> I have a problem with the Access 2 compatibilty layer for VB3. I
>have a number of databases out in the field which are using access 1.1
>format, but I recently installed the compatibility layer so I now only
>use access 2 version databases.
What seems to be the problem? Quote: > Each of my database users has a utility to compact and repair
>his database. It has been necessary to add a new facility to this
>utility for an old customer who still has only access 1.1 files, but I
>cant seem to stop the compact function from converting to v2 files, Ive
>tried using the DB_VERSION10 option in the compactdatabase line but it
>just seems to ignore it ,
Why is it a problem for the user to be converted to the Access version 2.0 database format? What problem happens after the DB is converted? Quote: >eg. CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", DB_VERSION10
>also CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", 1
>Neither seems to work.
Once the compatability layer is installed, I believe that the meaning of the DB_VERSION10 constant is changed-- i.e. the new meaning is that "version10" now means 1.1. Look in the release notes that came with the compatability layer, I believe this is noted there. I would still want to know what kind of problem is caused
by converting VB3 application users from the Access 1.1 to
the Access 2.0 database format. I think I may have a
reason to need to do that!
|
| Fri, 29 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Geoff Whi
#4 / 6
|
VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem Quote:
> I have a problem with the Access 2 compatibilty layer for VB3. I
>have a number of databases out in the field which are using access 1.1
>format, but I recently installed the compatibility layer so I now only
>use access 2 version databases.
What seems to be the problem? Quote: > Each of my database users has a utility to compact and repair
>his database. It has been necessary to add a new facility to this
>utility for an old customer who still has only access 1.1 files, but I
>cant seem to stop the compact function from converting to v2 files, Ive
>tried using the DB_VERSION10 option in the compactdatabase line but it
>just seems to ignore it ,
Why is it a problem for the user to be converted to the Access version 2.0 database format? What problem happens after the DB is converted? Quote: >eg. CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", DB_VERSION10
>also CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", 1
>Neither seems to work.
Once the compatability layer is installed, I believe that the meaning of the DB_VERSION10 constant is changed-- i.e. the new meaning is that "version10" now means 1.1. Look in the release notes that came with the compatability layer, I believe this is noted there. I would still want to know what kind of problem is caused
by converting VB3 application users from the Access 1.1 to
the Access 2.0 database format. I think I may have a
reason to need to do that!
|
| Fri, 29 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Steve Lac
#5 / 6
|
VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem
Quote:
>> I have a problem with the Access 2 compatibilty layer for VB3. I
>>have a number of databases out in the field which are using access 1.1
>>format, but I recently installed the compatibility layer so I now only
>>use access 2 version databases.
> What seems to be the problem?
>> Icant seem to stop the compact function from converting to v2 files,
Ive
>>tried using the DB_VERSION10 option in the compactdatabase line but it
>>just seems to ignore it ,
> Why is it a problem for the user to be converted to the Access
> version 2.0 database format? What problem happens after the DB is
> converted?
I cant convert the users database to version 2 because he uses access 1.1 to generated custom reports from the system that the customer designs himself, and he doesnt see the need to buy access 2 ! Quote: >>eg. CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", DB_VERSION10
>>also CompactDatabase oldbname , newdbname , "", 1
>>Neither seems to work.
> Once the compatability layer is installed, I believe that the
> meaning of the DB_VERSION10 constant is changed--
> i.e. the new meaning is that "version10" now means 1.1.
> Look in the release notes that came with the compatability
> layer, I believe this is noted there.
Yes the constant does change, but I am using 'db_version10' in the options but am expecting it to give me a version 1.1 database but it doesnt, it converts the database to v2 -- Steve Lacy
|
| Sat, 30 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Geoff Whi
#6 / 6
|
VB3 - Access 2.0 Compat Layer compact problem Quote:
<snip>
>I cant convert the users database to version 2 because he uses access
>1.1 to generated custom reports from the system that the customer
>designs himself, and he doesnt see the need to buy access 2 !
<snip> Ah, I see now. <snip> Quote: >Yes the constant does change, but I am using 'db_version10' in the
>options but am expecting it to give me a version 1.1 database but it
>doesnt, it converts the database to v2
<snip> Yes, I think have seen something similar with "CREATEDB,"--
once the compatability layer is installed, you can no longer
create version 1.1 databases, even when you specify
DB_VERSION10.
I wonder if you would have a way to avoid installing the
compatability layer on this user's machine, or remove it if
already installed. Then maybe you could have a single
version of the application to support both version 1.1 and
2.0 databases. Sorry I haven't been much help, but
thank you for explaining the reason for the problem.
If I had a user who had custom code and would not
move forward from Access 1.1 in order to use new
versions of my application, I would probably provide
new releases to other users and let that one "stew" for
a while-- tell 'em I do not have an easy way to do what
they want, and ask again about upgrading from Access
1.1. I mean, how much is this gonna cost them-- less
than $200 and maybe an hour or so to install? I know
this probably isn't the answer you are looking for-- so
good luck getting to where you want to be.
Geoff White
Product Manager, Power Closer, Windows Real Estate Settlements
Argosy Legal Systems
|
| Sun, 31 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT |
|
| |
|
