Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    After I add a new Field Name to the end of an existing table, it is not visible when displaying the table in design or table view. It is also not visible when designing a query. However, if the entire table is used in a select query the field is visible in the results of the query.
    If another field is added, then the previous one is visible and the new one is not.
    The field is visible when designing forms and reports.
    Can anyone shed some light on this strange behavior??

  2. #2
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    84,353
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 29 Times in 29 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    I have never experienced or heard of this error, and a search didn't turn up anything useful.

    Does the problem remain if you
    1. Compact and Repair the database?
    2. Close and reopen the database?
    3. Restart your PC?
    4. Import the tables into a new blank database?

  3. #3
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sacramento, California, USA
    Posts
    16,775
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    In addition to Hans instructions, can you tell us *how* you're adding the fields? Are you doing it from design view of the table, from code, or what? And are these Access tables in an mdb or SQL Server tables in an ADP?
    Charlotte

  4. #4
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Grass Valley, California, USA
    Posts
    88
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    I have seen behavior like this when I had the tables defined in a background MDB file, and linked to them from the foreground MDB file.

    My solution was to simply delete the link, and re-establish the link to the modified table. It seems that the foreground MDB must obtain and save locally some of the table characteristics for local use. Apparently, the delete/link process refreshes that saved information.

    However, if your referenced/modified table is local (not linked), then I, too, have never seen the problem.

    -- Jim

  5. #5
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Hans, the answers to your questions are:

    1. Yes
    2. Yes
    3. Yes
    4. Have not tried this, but will try it later when I get to system that has the Design Master on it.

    Charlote, the answers are:

    The tables are in a MBD and is a DB that I have been using for about 2 years with no table changes. However, the need to add some fields to a couple of tables brought the situation to light.

    The fields are being added in design view to an existing table.

  6. #6
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sacramento, California, USA
    Posts
    16,775
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Excuse me, but "the Design Master"? Are you dealing with a replicated back end or front end? If so, are you syncing and still not seeing the field?
    Charlotte

  7. #7
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Not everyone works in a network enviroment. When I look at the db, it says it is the Design Mater. Getting into a back end or front end enviroment is just too complicated and not needed.
    It is a fairly simple db and I have a replica of the db on my laptop for informational purposes. The replica exhibits the same problem.
    Thinking I should have suck with 97?

  8. #8
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Hans: In answer to your question #4 -

    Importing the tables to a new blank db from the Design Master or a Replica shows all fields. However, there are some new fields added to the tables. These fields start with Gen_ or s_. If importing to a blank db solves this, what should be done with the extra fields.
    I assume that importing everything to a blank db creates a new starting point.

    Thanks for your thoughts.

  9. #9
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sacramento, California, USA
    Posts
    16,775
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Replication isn't specific to networks and it has nothing to do with 97 vs 2000. Briefcase replication is intended to allow a laptop to sync files to a desktop. However, replication introduces additional complications and needs to be considered in examining the problem. If it is a replicated front end or a single database application that is replicated, then you have to sync design changes before you make data changes to avoid running into data conflicts. The additional fields you mentioned in your reply to Hans are fields that are hidden in replicas but are used by the replication process to resolve conflicts and insure unique identifiers in records.

    I'll go back to my earlier question, are you syncing the design changes between the master and the replica on your laptop and then still not seeing the new fields? You must make design changes *only* in the design master and then you must sync the master and replica to pass those changes to the replica. If you have made data changes in the replica, you may run into conflicts since the equivalent data in the master will be different.
    Charlotte

  10. #10
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    My reference to 97 vs 2000 was in light of not having any problems of this type with 97.
    The answer to your question is yes.

    It is always last field added to the table or the last field in the table that is not seen. This is right after adding the field. It is always the last field added that is hidden. And I always add new fields at the end of a table. Adding a new field causes the field that previously last to be seen.

    All design changes are made in the Design Master. As I stated before the replica on my laptop is for reference and information, and they are synced about once a month. No changes to data or design are made on the laptop and I sort of consider it a backup.

  11. #11
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Evergreen, CO, USA
    Posts
    6,623
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 60 Times in 60 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Having worked with replication a fair bit, I would strongly counsel you to split the database and not have the database with forms, code, reports, etc replicated. That way you only have to replicate the data, and the only time you will see design changes to a replica is when you add fields to a table, which should be pretty infrequent as you have discovered. And frankly we've found 2000 replication to be much more robust than 97 - conflict resolution in 97 was a bear compared to 2000/2002. There are some known replication issues that are fixed with the most recent SP for Jet, that being SP8 - see <!mskb=239114>Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 239114<!/mskb> for details on how to determine what version of Jet 4.0 you have. That could explain the behavior you are seeing - I have never experienced it with a replicated database.
    Wendell

  12. #12
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Wendell:

    Followed your suggestion. Jet 4.o on my desktop is an older version. On my laptop it is current. Don't know how this happened, because my update logs are identidcal.

    Will download the latest Jet 4.0 and apply it to my desktop. Any other steps I should follow??

  13. #13
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Spring Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    Updated Jet 4.0 to SP8 on my desktop. No change in behaviour.
    Ran "Compact and Repair". No change in behaviour.

    Maybe I'll have to start over by importing everything into a new db, remove all replication fields from the tables and use it as my base. This really only effects me, but, it would be nice to solve the apparent problem.

    Really don't like strange things happening that can't be explained!!

  14. #14
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Evergreen, CO, USA
    Posts
    6,623
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 60 Times in 60 Posts

    Re: Invisible Field Names (2000-SP3)

    If you decide to take the path of getting rid of replication, take a look at the Access Help topic "Make a replicated database a regular database" - it isn't a trivial exercise, but one I've been though a couple of times when misguided users decide to create a replicated database for whatever reason.
    Wendell

Posting Permissions

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