Date:         Fri, 7 Mar 2008 07:20:40 -0800
Reply-To:     Bill McKirgan <Bill.McKirgan@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Bill McKirgan <Bill.McKirgan@GMAIL.COM>
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Subject:      Re: We may have goofed on an MSAccess database..
Comments: To: sas-l@uga.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Mar 7, 3:56 am, ben.pow...@CLA.CO.UK wrote:
> You can run an update process if there is a unique id. Have SAS write to an
> update table then run the update in Access - bear in mind Access by
> comparison is orders of magnitude slower. Use a macro in the mdb - which
> can be executed by sas or a scheduled job via a desktop shortcut - to run
> the update table against the existing table according to the unique id. As
> a final step have the macro drop the update table.
>
> HTH.

Many great ideas in this thread.

Ben,

It sounds like you are saying we could have SAS create a new table...
something like

"table_update_&DATESTAMP." and put that into the access db that
requires the periodic update

Then in Access one could create an Access Macro file SAS could execute
and trigger an Access Update Query to take care of the minion work.

If that's right, I totally understand the concept, but need to play
around with the idea a bit.




I'm also going to try Roy's idea on using SQL to delete and replace
records.  Since I use Access in a flat-file way I would not have to
worry -much- about any contention between table relationships, and/or
users having a lock on a record while I'm mucking about with it.  Of
course, a backup before doing such a thing would be a good idea, and
that's easy enough in my situation where we are working with hundreds
of records, not thousands, or tens of thousands.

-- Bill