Adam-
Well, I'm an exception to the "rule" about using AutoNumber. If you have
a "natural" Primary Key, then use it! But why have two fields? You can
have one Text field that does the trick. It's not hard to strip off the
number part to add 1. I would also force leading zeroes in the number
part so that they sort correctly. E.G. W000019
Use Format(lngNewNumber, "000000") to get the leading zeroes you need.
John Viescas, Author
Microsoft Access 2010 Inside Out
Microsoft Access 2007 Inside Out
Microsoft Access 2003 Inside Out
Building Microsoft Access Applications
SQL Queries for Mere Mortals
http://www.viescas.com/
(Paris, France)
-----Original Message-----
From: AdamF <runuphillracing@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: <MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 8:08 PM
To: <MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [MS_AccessPros] Autonumber or not?
I know you (the experts) usually prefer using an autonumber to a custom
ID. However ....
This is for a jewelry company. They identify each inventory item by a one
letter indicating type (e.g., W=watch, R=ring), and a number. The numbers
increment for each type of item (e.g., W1, W2, W3, ...; R1, R2, R3, ...).
Thus, the primary keys are a combination of two fields:
ItemType - 1 char text
InvNo - long integer. I will be* adding these using dMax + 1.
*I say "will be" because the database I took over had the different types
of items in separate tables (with an autonumber). I initially brought them
together via union queries (didn't have the time budgeted to do a full
redesign until now).
So, do I have a good reason to drop the autonumber?
Adam
Denver, CO
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (2) |
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar