This week's book giveaway is in the Cloud/Virtualization forum. We're giving away four copies of Learning OpenStack Networking: Build a solid foundation in virtual networking technologies for OpenStack-based clouds and have James Denton on-line! See this thread for details.
Most people don't have time to wade through a bunch of code, so if you could distill your problem down to a few lines of code, you might get some more responses. Also, please post any exceptions you code generates.
One thing you might look at is updates and inserts routinely fail because of problems related to the keys.
You can connect from a Windows machine to an MDB file that resides on a Linux machine using this method, but you cannot connect from a Linux machine to a MDB file residing on another computer this way.
This "DSN-less" connection is not really DSN-less. Instead of configuring an explicit System or Machine DSN using the ODBC manager on a Windows box, when the JDBC:ODBC bridge contacts the ODBC service with the DSN string, the ODBC service creates the connection on the fly.
Linux does not have the Windows ODBC service, so it cannot create the DSN on the fly.
Cheers, [ February 01, 2006: Message edited by: Tom Blough ]
If you have access to Access and both MDB files, use import/link to add a symbolic link to one of the tables in the other database. You can then use a simple SQL to accomplish the task in the MDB that contains both the tables:
Originally posted by Ken Blair: I didn't say there was no reason to convert to CHM, I just pointed out you can search the Javadoc using Google. A lot of people forget (or don't know to begin with) that you can specify a site.
Really??? I just tried it on the airplane yesterday and I got a DNS error when trying to connect to Google. Perhaps your solution only works when you have an internet connection and the lister was looking for something that worked ALL the time?
If you are using Java 1.5, you might also look at For-Each. If you just need to move through the elements, then for-each works great. If you multiple iterators to access an element (i.e. multidimensional lists), or want to delete items, then you can't use the for-each construct.
Cheers, [ December 14, 2005: Message edited by: Tom Blough ]
Unfortunately, I can't rely on a collision using my key. The key is a data stamp generated from a machine on our factory floor that uses both upper and lowercase letters. Each date code is unique, but Access thinks "dqKez" is the same as "dqKeZ" as far as unique primary keys are concerned (it's not case sensitive for key comparison).
Access IS case sensitive on queries, so the work-around is check if it exists first, and add only if it does not. If the search returns the key, then I handle the exception case.
Due to Access' lack of case sensitivity on the primary key, I need to check if a record exists before I insert a new record. Is it faster to return a count, or to return actual data from a table? I.E. which of the following queries will be faster?
1) SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table WHERE id = 'Test';
2) SELECT id FROM table WHERE id = 'Test';
I don't really need the info returned - I'll just check to see if ResultSet.next is true.