Temporarily remove referential integrity checks through VBA?

[Keith]

Whoa, now!! Back up the truck. I'm sorry if you feel that my reply was
an attempt to be a smart ass and to score cheap points at your expense.
I can assure you that that was not my intent.

Fair enough. It did seem a tad aggressive to me, perhaps yesterday was
a "bad Day".

I really was trying to
point out that your solution wouldn't work and why it wouldn't for the
benefit of the OP primarily and for you as well. You then replied that
the OP was to adapt your code for his needs. I then responded that after
you remove the OldValue part of the function that there was nothing left
that could be used to solve his problem as the OldValue was the key part
of that function. I was wondering if, after the OldValue part of the
function was dismissed, what you thought was still there to adapt? It
was a question, in case I had missed something else in there. I'm sorry
you took offense to that. Perhaps I could have written it differently.

I think you could, I read that as being confrontational. As I said
before I read the OP very quickly and hadn't realised the significance
of the form being unbound and offered the code, warts and all, in case
the OP could have made use of it in one way or another. I just thought
that 'Great idea, except that ...' came across as sarcasm.

I'm not sure what there is about my responses that 'pales into
insignificance'. Perhaps, you would explain to me the error of my ways?
I certainly don't think of myself as hard to get along with, but perhaps
there is something in the way I write that comes off that way. I was
unaware of it. What could/should I have done differently?

I'm not going to attempt to preach to you how you should and should not
post on a public forum, I am in no position to do that. Having said that
I think that this is the first time I have ranted on here like I did
yesterday, perhaps I saw a red rag that wasn't really there. The
'pales' jibe was just my temper talking, please disregard it and accept
my apologies.

In the exchange with David you refer to, he refused to acknowledge that
what I said I had done was true, he said I was a lier, and even when
faced with several sources of reference to back my story up, he still
refused to believe it. I can't see how you would place me as the
aggressor in that thread.

It came across as two stags locking horns and I guess I thought you were
attempting a similar tack with me. You have stated that that was not
your intention and I believe you, I would not call you a liar or a lier
(yes I did spot that typo first time around).

Have a good day, I'm hoping to have a better one than I did yesterday.

Regards,
Keith.

 

[David W. Fenton]

I am sure you are aware that many SQL gurus use natural keys for
their PKs so I won't try to convert you <g>.

I think many SQL gurus are more concerned with theory than with ease
of use and maintenance.

One particular SQL guru strikes as a complete blowhard asshole.

As to natural PKs, well, they cause problems, and that's one of the
reasons why surrogate keys are better, because you avoid precisely
the kinds of problems encountered with the circular relationships.

 

[Bri]

Fair enough. It did seem a tad aggressive to me, perhaps yesterday was
a "bad Day".

It happens, hope you're having a better day today.

I think you could, I read that as being confrontational. As I said
before I read the OP very quickly and hadn't realized the significance
of the form being unbound and offered the code, warts and all, in case
the OP could have made use of it in one way or another. I just thought
that 'Great idea, except that ...' came across as sarcasm.

Actually, it was sincere. I thought it was great code for an audit
trail. In fact, I mentioned that I used something similar myself.

I'm not going to attempt to preach to you how you should and should not
post on a public forum, I am in no position to do that. Having said that
I think that this is the first time I have ranted on here like I did
yesterday, perhaps I saw a red rag that wasn't really there. The
'pales' jibe was just my temper talking, please disregard it and accept
my apologies.

Apology accepted.

By pointing out where you saw sarcasm, you did what I was asking. Now I
have a reference for where something I wrote was taken differently than
intended, I can watch for it in the future.

It came across as two stags locking horns and I guess I thought you were
attempting a similar tack with me. You have stated that that was not
your intention and I believe you, I would not call you a liar or a lier
(yes I did spot that typo first time around).

Well, I'm not going to let someone call me a liar (not a typo, spelling
is not my strongest suit and the spell checker didn't catch it) and not
try to defend myself. If you followed the whole thread, you would have
seen that the force of my writing escalated with each reply where he
refused to even check the references I supplied. I didn't start out
writing to him that way (or at least I didn't intend to).

Have a good day, I'm hoping to have a better one than I did yesterday.

Regards,
Keith.

Having a great day, thanks. And to you.

 

[rkc]

Can you imagine Fabian posting to this thread, 'I don't see any
situations where DRI should be disabled,' and only after interrogation
qualified with, 'because I consider SQL to be a bad thing'?

Does this sound like a certain someone's involvement in this thread,
David <g>?

What does SQL have to do with referential integrity?

 

[aaron.kempf]

keith

i applaud david fentons work

keith this isn't gradeschool... what are you going to do 'tell on us'
for talking like we would in the real world?

go back to 2nd grade keith and learn how to deal with people

or is keithie scared of a couple of big words??

 

[Tony Toews]

or is keithie scared of a couple of big words??

Aaron.

Your postings are inappropriate for these newsgroups. Please leave.

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

 

[aaron.kempf]

Tony

Your obsolete MDB bullshit doesn't belong on MY FORUM.

Grow up and learn a real database engine kid.

I'm personally sick and tired of compact and repair.
tired of corruption; re-linking.. and all that crap.

I have a superior solution.

I can create RI through scripts whenver i want.

I find it funny the 'groupthink' on this newsgroup
people slam people for willing to think outside the box.

I find it laughable that Keith was freaking out over nothing.
This isn't Sunday school.

This is WHERE LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE COME TO DISCUSS AND ARGUE.

Maybe if you kids don't like people talking in uppercase letters? Then
maybe you kids should have stopped using an obsolete database 5 years
ago.

Goddamn kids learn a real RDBMS

Access Data Projects are superior to MDB in every imaginable way.

-Aaron

 

[rkc]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL

See the 'Concepts' section.

I didn't see any mention of SQL in the Referential Integrity
entry under that topic.

 

[aaron.kempf]

fucking retards

SQL Server is more powerful
anyone that uses MDB in the year 2006?

you should spit on them.
out of the blue; just walk up to them and spit.

you can have constraints-- you can have triggers-- you can have custom
dataTypes

 

[Terry Kreft]

IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM newsgroup WHERE user_name = 'aaron')
BEGIN
DELETE FROM newsgroup WHERE user_name = 'aaron'
RAISERROR ('Troll alert - %d talking garbage', 16, 127, 'aaron')
END

 

[Keith Wilby]

That's my insomnia cured. Thanks.

 

[rkc]

The entry for 'SQL' references the entry for 'Referential Integrity'
but not the other way around. What's your point?

Referential integrity is not an SQL concept.
It's a relational database design concept.

 

[aaron.kempf]

good stuff


IF EXISTS (SELECT TOP 1 'X' FROM newsgroup WHERE tool_of_choice =
'MDB')
BEGIN
RAISERROR ('oh wait a second mdb can't handle real tsql
statements; it is for babies', 16, 127, 'horsecrap')
END

 

[Arno R]

Don't trolls get bored of themselves ??
Not even sometimes ??

You are a horsecrap baby indeed ...

Arno R

 

[aaron.kempf]

no i dont get tired.

you pansies just look funny dancing around with your pink mdb files

oh; look at the little babies playing with MDB.. how CUTE!!!



-Aaron

 

[Terry Kreft]

I love the way that you have no compunction about showing how ignorant you
are of both transact SQL and Access SQL and the way that you're not afraid
of displaying your stupidity in public is really marvelous.

 

[dbahooker]

Terry;

screw yourself; I am much better at Access AND Sql than anyone i've
ever seen on this newsgroup.

And most importantly; I dont just blindly use the first tool the comes
across my desk.

I use the best tool for whatever I am doing.

Most of your idiots are unnecessarily biased agasint Access Data
Projects.
I find that laughable.


-Aaron

 

[Lyle Fairfield]

I am much better at Access AND Sql than anyone i've
ever seen on this newsgroup.

We're all grateful that you have shared your expertise here in CDMA.
But some of us may have missed one or two of your better contributions.
Would you list the links to a few, say ten, of your creative and
original posts so that we can reference them as a small library of
excellence?

In addition, this may help us to remember to maintain the appropriate
level of deferential integrity in our discussions with you.

 

[Terry Kreft]

Ha, ha, ha, it's just marvellous how you have not the slightest piece of
self-respect.

Please continue to show us how wonderful you are<g>; I've quite given up
reading Dilbert as your contributions are so much more originally funny.

You might not know much about programming (except in your world of course)
but you certainly know how to amuse!

I've only seen one piece of code from you and it was so laughably wrong but
far too subtle I thought, most people probably thought you meant it to be
like that.

 

[Keith Wilby]

no i dont get tired.

I'm sure that one day we'll read a news item about you that concludes "...
before turning the gun on himself."