Prev: Installing/Upgrading Office 2010 - keeping Access 97
Next: reThink Migration – It’s Time for Change!
From: Tony Toews on 11 Jun 2010 17:55
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 08:51:21 -0400, "AVG"
<NOSPAMagiamb(a)newsgroup.nospam> wrote:

>Also referring ot SQL Server 2008 R2, which just came out.
>Any problems with forms, subforms, etc. bound to tables & views?

Probably a bit too soon to tell. So you'll be on the bleeding edge.
<smile>

If you can though you might want to see if you can install SQL Server
2008 (non R2) Express on your own system. Then create a test system
to see if any strangeness exists just in R2.

Tony
From: David W. Fenton on 11 Jun 2010 19:30
Tony Toews <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in
news:d3c516lq8cpqqu8hi4lcs36ukgq8ov7mjl(a)4ax.com:

> If you can though you might want to see if you can install SQL
> Server 2008 (non R2) Express on your own system. Then create a
> test system to see if any strangeness exists just in R2.

It's 64-bit only, right?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
From: AVG on 12 Jun 2010 08:33
Thanks for the reply Tony.
I am currenty converting a large system from Access 2000 fe/be to Access
2007 fe/SQL Server 2005 Express be. When I get to the point of final
testing, I plan to try R2 Express. I was just wondering if anyone had
already tried it.
Typically, I stay away from new things until out for a while, but at the
rate this project has been growing, it would save some pain to not have to
worry about the 4GB limit. Since I won't be using any of the 'new' features,
I'm just hoping that they didn't 'break' the old stuff, like they did with
Access 2007.
I actually found a bug in Access 2007 where it doesn't construct a proper
where clause when requesting an inserted record for a form bound to an
updatable SQL Server view. I have on open case with MS for over three months
now and they are still scratching their heads to find a workaround - never
mind a fix.

--

AG
Email: npATadhdataDOTcom


"Tony Toews" <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:d3c516lq8cpqqu8hi4lcs36ukgq8ov7mjl(a)4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 08:51:21 -0400, "AVG"
> <NOSPAMagiamb(a)newsgroup.nospam> wrote:
>
>>Also referring ot SQL Server 2008 R2, which just came out.
>>Any problems with forms, subforms, etc. bound to tables & views?
>
> Probably a bit too soon to tell. So you'll be on the bleeding edge.
> <smile>
>
> If you can though you might want to see if you can install SQL Server
> 2008 (non R2) Express on your own system. Then create a test system
> to see if any strangeness exists just in R2.
>
> Tony



From: AVG on 12 Jun 2010 08:42
No, there are both 32 and 64 bit versions.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143506.aspx

--

AG
Email: npATadhdataDOTcom


"David W. Fenton" <XXXusenet(a)dfenton.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9D94C67425660f99a49ed1d0c49c5bbb2(a)74.209.136.90...
> Tony Toews <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in
> news:d3c516lq8cpqqu8hi4lcs36ukgq8ov7mjl(a)4ax.com:
>
>> If you can though you might want to see if you can install SQL
>> Server 2008 (non R2) Express on your own system. Then create a
>> test system to see if any strangeness exists just in R2.
>
> It's 64-bit only, right?
>
> --
> David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
> usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/



From: David W. Fenton on 12 Jun 2010 16:02
"AVG" <NOSPAMagiamb(a)newsgroup.nospam> wrote in
news:4c1380ce$0$4974$607ed4bc(a)cv.net:

> No, there are both 32 and 64 bit versions.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143506.aspx

You're right -- I should have just checked what I'd already
downloaded from MSDN! It's Windows Server 2008 R2 that is
64-bit-only, I think.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Installing/Upgrading Office 2010 - keeping Access 97
Next: reThink Migration – It’s Time for Change!