Re: Autonumbering failure after conversion from 2.0 to 2003
- From: "Douglas J. Steele" <NOSPAM_djsteele@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:53:51 -0500
Why do you say that's not a correct number? Unless you're using a
Replication ID Autonumber, the Autonumber is simply a Long Integer, which
means that any value between -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647 is legitimate.
Autonumbers exist for one purpose only: to provide a (practically
guaranteed) unique value that can be used as a primary
key. -21,641,464, -21,641,463, 21,641,461 (or -21,641,464, 18, -3,632)
serves that purpose just as well as 1, 2, 4.
Fact of the matter is, Autonumbers are seldom displayed to the user anyhow,
so it shouldn't make any difference. If the value of the number matters to
you, you probably shouldn't be using an Autonumber.
--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP
http://I.Am/DougSteele
(no e-mails, please!)
<knud.n@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1135021927.799100.31450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hello Everyone
>
> After converting my database from 2.0 to 2003 format, using the
> converter downloaded from microsofts homepage, all the fields that uses
> autonumbering does not work. Instedet of generating a correct
> incrementet number, the autonumbering generates a large negative
> number.
> Does anyone have any suggestions ???
> Any help is very much appreciated, thanks.
>
.
- References:
- Autonumbering failure after conversion from 2.0 to 2003
- From: knud . n
- Autonumbering failure after conversion from 2.0 to 2003
- Prev by Date: Powerbuilder 9.0
- Next by Date: Re: Autonumbering failure after conversion from 2.0 to 2003
- Previous by thread: Autonumbering failure after conversion from 2.0 to 2003
- Next by thread: Re: Autonumbering failure after conversion from 2.0 to 2003
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
