Re: Really disconnect a recordset?
- From: "Stephen Howe" <sjhoweATdialDOTpipexDOTcom>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:36:48 +0100
> Is there a way to completely disconnect a recordset so that it has no
> memory of its server origins?
Yes if opened client-sided. Not otherwise.
> I've got a recordset that comes from a query where some of the fields are
> derived and not actual table fields. On the client side, I want to be
> able to update those fields in the local recordset without ever doing an
> update back to SQL Server. Because of the underlying schema and dynamic
> properties, ADO is not allowing me to "update" the these fields.
It wouldn't be because it is server-sided?
> Basically, I want to take the data from this recordset and put it into
> another recordset with an identical "shallow" schema -- meaning same
> column names and column types but none of the other attributes that link
> it to the provider, so that I can manipulate it like a local-only
> recordset?
It is overkill.
Make it client-sided, make sure locktype is not readonly, disconnect the
connection and you should be okay.
Stephen Howe
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Really disconnect a recordset?
- From: Mike Jansen
- Re: Really disconnect a recordset?
- References:
- Really disconnect a recordset?
- From: Mike Jansen
- Really disconnect a recordset?
- Prev by Date: Re: ADODB Command memory leak
- Next by Date: Win2k Server Shutting Down
- Previous by thread: Really disconnect a recordset?
- Next by thread: Re: Really disconnect a recordset?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
