how do i delete a relationship in access
fullard@discussions.microsoft.com alan fullard
not very helpfull
aaron...@gmail.com
On Apr 9, 2:28 am, alan fullard <alan
Daniel Pineault
Open the relationship 'viewer'
Click on the relationship between the two tables you wish to delete (it will
become bold)
Press the delete key on your keyboard
For an introduction to relationships you may want to take a look at
http://www.functionx.com/access/Lesson12.htm
--
Hope this helps,
Daniel Pineault
For Access Tips and Examples: http://www.cardaconsultants.com/en/msaccess.php
If this post was helpful, please rate it by using the vote buttons.
Brendan Reynolds
news:64CEDBA7-8E3F-449E...@microsoft.com...
> can any one help i want to delete a relationship in access as online help
> is
> not very helpfull
Manually or programmatically? Manually, in the Relationships window,
right-click the relationship line between the two tables and choose Delete
from the shortcut menu. Programmatically, you can do it via DAO. You'll
first need to know the name of the relationship. The following procedure
should provide enough information to identify it ...
Public Sub ListRelationships()
Dim db As DAO.Database
Dim rels As DAO.Relations
Dim rel As DAO.Relation
Set db = CurrentDb
Set rels = db.Relations
Debug.Print "Name", , "Table", "Foreign Table"
For Each rel In rels
Debug.Print rel.Name, , rel.Table, rel.ForeignTable
Next rel
End Sub
Once you have the name of the relationship you want to delete, deleting it
is easy ...
CurrentDb.Relations.Delete "NameOfYourRelationshipHere"
--
Brendan Reynolds
aaron...@gmail.com
DAO for _ANY_ reason whatsover-- is not reccomended; it was not
included with Windows or Office for almost a decade.
DAO is a memory leak waiting to happen.
If your variables won't clean up after themselves; then move to
someone that will.
-Aaron
On Apr 9, 3:21 am, "Brendan Reynolds"
<brenr...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> "alan fullard" <alan full...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messagenews:64CEDBA7-8E3F-449E...@microsoft.com...
aaron...@gmail.com
-Aaron
On Apr 9, 2:48 am, "aaron.ke...@gmail.com" <aaron.ke...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > not very helpfull- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Roger Carlson
database and go to Tools>References to see that this is patently false.
--
--Roger Carlson
MS Access MVP
www.rogersaccesslibrary.com
<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:22216065-cb67-44ea...@r9g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
![Tony Toews [MVP]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjVFNFhAO8kxGtutFBSPYzx5Lbrrty7WRKPHNhjuWtTEHvsoQdk=s40-c)
Tony Toews [MVP]
>Warning!!
>
>DAO for _ANY_ reason whatsover-- is not reccomended; it was not
>included with Windows or Office for almost a decade.
>DAO is a memory leak waiting to happen.
>
>If your variables won't clean up after themselves; then move to
>someone that will.
Absolutely wrong.
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
If your variables won't clean up after themselves; then move to
someone that will.
How is that wrong? I mean _HONESTLY_. I don't need to cleanup
variables-- they grow out of scope and I'm done with them. It's a
perfectly logical statement.
Please explain- oh mightly Tony-- how you can just magically say it is
wrong-- when it is obviously a compelling EVIDENCE to continue to move
away from DAO. DAO was niether included or upgraded in a decade.
-Aaron
On Apr 9, 11:31 am, "Tony Toews [MVP]" <tto...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> "aaron.ke...@gmail.com" <aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Warning!!
>
> >DAO for _ANY_ reason whatsover-- is not reccomended; it was not
> >included with Windows or Office for almost a decade.
> >DAO is a memory leak waiting to happen.
>
> >If your variables won't clean up after themselves; then move to
> >someone that will.
>
> Absolutely wrong.
>
> Tony
> --
> Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
> Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
> read the entire thread of messages.
> Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems athttp://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
It's not called DAO in 2007.
and it's not included - by default - in 2000 or 2002?
How many months was that between 2000 and the release of 2003?
How many more morsels of functionality can I do with ADO than you kids
can do with DAO?
How about _SHAPING_ the data?
Oh yah-- you guys don't know about that stuff.
DAO wasn't included with any version of MDAC from 2.6 upwards.
WIndows XP comes with MDAC 2.6.
I don't see-- what is wrong with my statement.
Everything that I said is 100% accurate.
_SORRY_.
I just won't be bullied into submission.
Take your JET or SHAREPOINT and _SHOVE_IT_.
-Aaron
On Apr 9, 9:47 am, "Roger Carlson" <RogerCarl...@noemail.noemail>
wrote:
> All you have to do is open _ANY_ code window in a brand new Access 2003
> database and go to Tools>References to see that this is patently false.
>
> --
> --Roger Carlson
> MS Access MVP
> www.rogersaccesslibrary.com
>
> <aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > Brendan Reynolds- Hide quoted text -
Pete D.
the replies to you over the years, those are the points you should take.
<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:43b24cbe-bfb0-421a...@i36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
Is it included - by default - in a decade's worth of databases?
Whatever kid.
With DAO, you've _GOT_ to clean up after your objects.
If you've got to
.CLOSE
or
Set dbs = Nothing
THEN IT IS TIME TO MOVE INTO A BETTER LIBRARY.
Dao is just a sloopy piece of crap library.
It has no benefits over ADO.
ADO provides DDL for creating objects-- a much better- more more
transparent route- than Access.
-Aaron
On Apr 9, 3:02 pm, "Pete D." <pduffy21...@coxDOT.net> wrote:
> Proven wrong, can't hit the basket and you want the points? Read each of
> the replies to you over the years, those are the points you should take.<aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:43b24cbe-bfb0-421a...@i36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> and for the record; I'll gladly take the points in this one
>
> -Aaron
>
> On Apr 9, 2:48 am, "aaron.ke...@gmail.com" <aaron.ke...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > uh right click and delete it? in the relationships window ;)
>
> > On Apr 9, 2:28 am, alan fullard <alan
>
> > full...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > can any one help i want to delete a relationship in access as online
> > > help is
> > > not very helpfull- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
included with Windows or Office for almost a decade.
DAO is a memory leak waiting to happen.
If your variables won't clean up after themselves; then move to
someone that will.
On Apr 9, 9:47 am, "Roger Carlson" <RogerCarl...@noemail.noemail>
wrote:
> All you have to do is open _ANY_ code window in a brand new Access 2003
> database and go to Tools>References to see that this is patently false.
>
> --
> --Roger Carlson
> MS Access MVP
> www.rogersaccesslibrary.com
>
> <aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > Brendan Reynolds- Hide quoted text -
Pete D.
wasn't default for a version but seems to me, it is again, so what planet
are you on? MS isn't stupid, apparently, you stopped saying you work for
them, did they wise up or was the whole thing a lie?
"a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m" <aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in
message
news:5055affd-9a6f-4454...@s39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Roger Carlson
Access 2.0. It was not SET as a reference in Access 2000 or 2002, but it
was certainly included. Whether it's called DAO in 2007 or not, is
immaterial and just an indication of the straws you are willing to grasp at
to prove your point.
--
--Roger Carlson
MS Access MVP
www.rogersaccesslibrary.com
"a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m" <aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in
message
news:f8d8fbcd-6cd1-4936...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
-Aaron
On Apr 10, 6:53 am, "Roger Carlson" <RogerCarl...@noemail.noemail>
wrote:
> Well, you're wrong. DAO has been included in every version of Access since
> Access 2.0. It was not SET as a reference in Access 2000 or 2002, but it
> was certainly included. Whether it's called DAO in 2007 or not, is
> immaterial and just an indication of the straws you are willing to grasp at
> to prove your point.
>
> --
> --Roger Carlson
> MS Access MVP
> www.rogersaccesslibrary.com
>
> "a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m" <aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote in
> messagenews:f8d8fbcd-6cd1-4936...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
Whether it's called DAO in 2007 or not, is immaterial
I disagree. If the library should have been called DAO 6.0 and it's
called Microsoft Access Data Objects or something stupid like that..
is that _MY_ Fault??
Take your half asses DAO bullshit and shove it.
_ANY_ library that makes you 'clean up before the variables go out of
scope' is worthless at best.
_ANY_ library that makes you 'clean up before the variables go out of
scope' is worthless at best.
_ANY_ library that makes you 'clean up before the variables go out of
scope' is worthless at best.
_ANY_ library that makes you 'clean up before the variables go out of
scope' is worthless at best.
_ANY_ library that makes you 'clean up before the variables go out of
scope' is worthless at best.
_ANY_ library that makes you 'clean up before the variables go out of
scope' is worthless at best.
On Apr 10, 6:53 am, "Roger Carlson" <RogerCarl...@noemail.noemail>
wrote:
> Well, you're wrong. DAO has been included in every version of Access since
> Access 2.0. It was not SET as a reference in Access 2000 or 2002, but it
> was certainly included. Whether it's called DAO in 2007 or not, is
> immaterial and just an indication of the straws you are willing to grasp at
> to prove your point.
>
> --
> --Roger Carlson
> MS Access MVP
> www.rogersaccesslibrary.com
>
> "a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m" <aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote in
> messagenews:f8d8fbcd-6cd1-4936...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
re:
I have used all versions and all had DAO. It
wasn't default for a version but seems to me, it is again
Can you explain that to me again-- word for word?
I mean.. Can I Just add a couple of words for you?
I have used all versions and all had DAO. It
wasn't default for a version but seems to me, it is again
_FOR_MY_DATABASE_TYPES_.
Sorry-- it is not included or default-- in Acess 2003 or Access 2007.
Blanket statements like that are not helpful, accurate or correct.
I am just here to clean up the misinformation that you fat old retards
give about DAO.
Again-- if your library makes you clean up after the variables-- THEN
FIND A NEW LIBRARY!
It actually is _NOT_ the default in Access 2007.
Or Access 2003 for that matter; you liars!
-Aaron
On Apr 9, 3:54 pm, "Pete D." <pduffy21...@coxDOT.net> wrote:
> Wrong, what an expert you are, I have used all versions and all had DAO. It
> wasn't default for a version but seems to me, it is again, so what planet
> are you on? MS isn't stupid, apparently, you stopped saying you work for
> them, did they wise up or was the whole thing a lie?
>
> "a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m" <aaron.ke...@gmail.com> wrote in
> messagenews:5055affd-9a6f-4454...@s39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
vbasean
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
Someone I talked to last summer thought it was yelling!
-Aaron
vbasean
>
> - Show quoted text -
Pieter Wijnen
Pieter
"Tony Toews [MVP]" <tto...@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:vq2qv31o4260fsnib...@4ax.com...
Tony Toews [MVP]
<it.isi.llegal.to.send.unsollic...@online.replace.with.norway>
wrote:
>Why do you still bother to answer?
Because others who are very unfamiliar with newsgroups may see Aaron's
answers in Google or other search engine. They might then assume that
Aaron is correct and/or that Aaron's obnoxious behavior is typical of
newsgroups.
a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m
that matter.
I _AM_ correct on everything that I've ever said.
Sorry Tony-- But reccomending a CRAP database -- and giving
misInformation about SQL Server is more dangerous than my helpful
posts.
-Aaron
On Apr 12, 6:24 pm, "Tony Toews [MVP]" <tto...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> "Pieter Wijnen"
> <it.isi.llegal.to.send.unsollicited.mail.wijnen.nospam.ple...@online.replace.with.norway>
> wrote:
>
> >Why do you still bother to answer?
>
> Because others who are very unfamiliar with newsgroups may see Aaron's
> answers in Google or other search engine. They might then assume that
> Aaron is correct and/or that Aaron's obnoxious behavior is typical of
> newsgroups.
>
> Tony
> --
> Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
> Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
> read the entire thread of messages.
> Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems athttp://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm