IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Ok, now I REALLY cornfuzed
Ran the compact/repair database utility. No change.

So I deleted the query and recreated it.

Works like it should. SQL select statement is EXACTLY like the original.

What a PIA.

Thanks Peter and Wade for suggestions.

If anyone else knows what might be causing this, please let me know. I hate having to recreate the query on a regular basis.
New Possible theory...
the SQL gets boiled down to a binary-verion-meta data thingy. I'm guessing Access then stores this query. If the query is semi-used often and it doesn't change, it'll pull the binary version rather than reboil the text down.

Now...the question is why the boiled down version was somehow modified. No idea there, but if Access thought the query was still the same, it wouldn't recalculate it.

That would explain why 'recreating' the sql fixed the problem.
     Another MS Access Question - (jbrabeck) - (16)
         Why does the column order matter? - (static) - (5)
             Output is used for other documents - (jbrabeck) - (4)
                 Ouch. - (static) - (3)
                     Wish I could ditch Access - (jbrabeck) - (2)
                         Harder? - (crazy) - (1)
                             Well... - (folkert)
         Re: Another MS Access Question - (pwhysall) - (6)
             I have dragged to columns around - (jbrabeck) - (5)
                 How peculiar. - (pwhysall) - (4)
                     I am the "DBA" - (jbrabeck) - (3)
                         I'm clutching at straws, TBH - (pwhysall) - (2)
                             I understand... - (jbrabeck) - (1)
                                 Time to put a report in the way, I think - (pwhysall)
         Ok, now I REALLY cornfuzed - (jbrabeck) - (1)
             Possible theory... - (Mycroft_Holmes_Iv)
         Are the tables linked from elsewhere? - (scoenye)

Almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
43 ms