Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Salem, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    219
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    One table is read-only (Access XP - SP2)

    Hello -- I've searched Microsoft for the answer, but can't seem to phrase the keywords exactly right.
    I have a split database, both FE/BE at the same location on the network. Users are secured through network, not Access securities. Most have read-only access, a couple have write. The read-only group crashes each and every time when opening a form or report involving one table, but not any of the others. If I upgrade the user to "write" privs for testing, they are fine. This is the Parent table, and it will crash if it's just being opened plain, as the single recordsource behind one form. I can't see anything unusual or different about form properties or my code. I've checked whether myself or another user w/ full Access is opening the whole database in "shared" mode (tho, that would affect all tables...) I "documented" table properties to see if I could identify a difference, and the one thing that jumped out was that only the problem table had a GUID string. This is the table I had test accessed using various methods to link, import data by code or by pass-through query, various other things in a separate database, and two tables and a form in that database also show a Guid # -- I don't know if that is normal, or not. Does anyone have any clues?

    This problem seemed to begin after I moved a FE/BE database on the network, but they may have happened prior, but no one noticed. Also, one of the network administrators, even, had trouble accessing the folder I initially moved the databases into, which was exceedingly wierd. We created yet another new folder, and that problem has disappeared. I don't think this is related to the problem, but, who knows.

    Thanks very much, anyone who made it through this long-winded explanation, and/or might have some suggestions.
    thx
    Pat

  2. #2
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Evergreen, CO, USA
    Posts
    6,623
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 60 Times in 60 Posts

    Re: One table is read-only (Access XP - SP2)

    The only thing that occurs to me off the top of my head is the existance of a GUID. There are only a couple of ways a GUID could get there. You can actually specify a GUID as a field type, but the presumption is you didn't do that. The other way is if a table is replicated using the Access replication feature. In that case you should have a couple of GUIDs. Otherwise it sounds like you may actually have some corruption in the BE database. I have seen corrupted databases display what appears to be a GUID in one or more records, even though the field type was not defined as such.
    Wendell

  3. #3
    4 Star Lounger SteveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chelsea, Gtr London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    587
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: One table is read-only (Access XP - SP2)

    I thought that user's must have FULL privileges on the folder which contains your BE files because Access must create an ldb file when it is opened. <img src=/S/shrug.gif border=0 alt=shrug width=39 height=15>
    Steve H
    IT Lecturer/Access Developer
    O2K SR3/O2010; Win7Pro

  4. #4
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Salem, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    219
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: One table is read-only (Access XP - SP2)

    Thank you, Wendell. I've been working with the table only (trying to rebuild it) but I'll search for presence of GUID in any records (only saw this in the table definition) and will plan to repair it. I appreciate your answer!
    thx
    Pat

  5. #5
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Salem, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    219
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: One table is read-only (Access XP - SP2)

    They do, actually -- the folder itself is has modify privs for everyone, but the databases (fe/be) themselves have more limited securities. Thanks for your input,
    Pat

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •