Hot fixes for three Access 2007 issues


I noticed the Access Junkie just posted a few links to KB articles that describe hot fixes for some blocking issues. Here are the highlights (or um, low lights):


ADP Perf
When you try to run a Microsoft Access project (.adp) in Access 2007, the project may run slowly. Or, the project may take longer than expected to respond to actions that are performed on the project.


Sub form short-cut menu
In Access 2007, you open a Microsoft Office Access 2003 database that contains a custom shortcut menu for a subform. Then, you right-click the subform. When you do this, the default shortcut menu is displayed instead of the custom shortcut menu.


DAO synchronize a replicated db
When you try to use Data Access Object (DAO) code to synchronize a replicated Access 2007 database, you receive the following error message:



Run-time error ‘3251’:
Operation is not supported for this type of object.

There are a number other articles that might be interesting for people trying to build 2007 applications. Here is the link: http://accessjunkie.com/kb.aspx.

 

BTW – I’m really glad that we have Jeff (the Access Junkie) working on the team. He is doing a great job now that his back has healed from packing over the new Access Inside Out book from MS Press :-).

 

Comments (18)

  1. kjm87 says:

    I’m not sure if this comment is PC.

    Some of the hot fixes are not directly available from the KB articles or Microsoft download center. However they can be downloaded from here:

    http://thehotfixshare.net/download/index.php?dir=Language%20Neutral/Office%202007/

  2. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    I’m not going to try A2007 before SP2. They have released pre-alpha as it seems… :-(

  3. kjm87 says:

    Vladimi­

    I think you comment is a little unfair. On the whole I find A07 works well. The number of errors & odd behaviours is very small compared to the functions in the whole application.

    Keith

  4. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    Hello, kjm87,

    I’m just experiencing that many Access bugs NEVER get fixed. I’d appreciate MS should fix all known bugs before next version of Access… and that they test Access more completely before they release it.

    In A2002 there are TOO MANY bugs and thus A2002 desperatelly needs SP3!!!

    Also, MS should make complete research on project database corruption and they would add functions that will forbide actions which may corrupt project database.

  5. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    Also see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/884185.

    Duplicate autonumber SUPER BUG should have NEVER leave Microsoft gates!!! IMHO, Access has not been tested before it’s release! This behaviour apply for A2002, A2003 and now for A2007! Pls, don’t say you test Access before you release it!!! It’s not true!!!

    :-( :-( :-(

  6. grovelli says:

    There’s also another option:

    They’ve tried but can’t find a way out 😉

    In any case "You may receive an error message" doesn’t mean that you automatically do.

  7. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    "They’ve tried but can’t find a way out ;-)"

    >>> Should we go back to A97 then?

    "In any case "You may receive an error message" doesn’t mean that you automatically do."

    >>> Unfortunatelly, in A2002 I do receive the error message, ie. I have a "duplicate-autonumber-bug" problem. :-(

    Ie. the bug remains in Access for at least 5 years now!

  8. kennethj says:

    Vladimi­r,

    I’d say you’re awful critical.  I want Access bugs fixed too.  But I can guarantee that Office is a bigger project than you’ve ever worked on and I’d bet anything you’ve never released and app that didn’t have any errors, not too mention an error that showed up in less than a week of release.  I ran Office through the beta program.  I wish I’d been able to do real Access testing on the databases I work on daily but wasn’t able to install a beta on the live enviroment so I can blame myself in some aspects that issues I have weren’t addressed sooner.  Maybe next time you should work with the beta so the issues you have can be fixed prior to the full release, or at least known.

    Ken

  9. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    Hello, Ken,

    5 years old bug isn’t yesterdays’ bug… :-/

  10. kennethj says:

    I consider that a very rare error that should never pop-up in normal use.  I have 400+ dbs built over 7 years and it’s occured once and then only because a record was forced back into the table with it’s proper autonumber value after it was mistakenly deleted.  This reseeded the table in an unnormal fashion.  If you just let the database pick the number and never force a value into the autonumber this error won’t occur.  In this case do you prevent the error by not allowing a number to be re-entered and upset users who do this occasionaly or do you allow the error to happen occasionaly and upset a few users.  This case might be better with a more sensical error handler but that’s all I’d ask for.  Not trying to be a jerk but just saying that we should be a little more accepting being developers and having similar issues.

    Ken

  11. Clint Covington says:

    Vladimir,

    This thread goes to show that the bug customers care most about is the one they hit most recently. This is the first I have ever heard about the issue.. The team did fix a number of old bugs that have frustrated developers for a while (see http://allenbrowne.com/Access2007.html#Solved). There are some bugs in Access 2007 which is to be expected given the amount of changes we made. Many of the issues listed on Allen’s site will get fixed in SP 1. We try to release hot fixes for critical issues that can’t wait. As a team, we need to continue to work hard every day to drive quality higher and higher. Shipping high quality software is something I take serious every day I show up to work.

    Also, we did do a bunch of work in 2007 on project corruption and improving the experience of handling corrupted projects. We have new logic that throw out the corrupted project and recompile the project.

    Thanks for the support KennethJ. I always appreciate hearing positive feedback from the community.

  12. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    Hello, Ken,

    (I hope) I always do exempt autonumber fields from For .. Each cycle in Fields collection when I merge data from one table to another. Same for Append/Action queries. But if there are many changes in database structrure I use a simple conversion program which copies old data to new (empty) database including autonumber fields and their values. I always compress new template database before I distribute it so that autonumber fields should be reset to zero. I had no problem with conversion for many years – it was working fine in A97. But it seems it may be a problem in A2002 and higher. (?)

    It was a big surprise that Jet 4 SP8 may lead to autonumber duplicates. If it’s Jet’s problem then the bug can be fixed soon, I suppose.

  13. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    TYVM for your respond, Clint.

    What I don’t like in A2002 is that some things have been re-arranged to worse or that implementation has changed in some ways… so that I’m not sure that everything from my old projects will perform the same way as it did in A97 – see my previous post. I’m affraid that A2007 (compared to previous versions) has similar "issues".

    See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/884185.

    At news.microsoft.com.access I have a responce from David Fenton who’s advice is to "to recreate the table and append the existing

    data from it. This usually reset the counter." I think I could use conversion program as I mentioned above. But Ken’s advice was NOT to "play games with autonumber fields" and let database engine create new ones. In such case I should lose data integrity, I suppose… especially if there are gaps in lookup tables (ie. some record have been deleted). If Ken is right I think I’ll have to re-write my old conversion program. In such case there must be special conversion for each database I have ever created – due to various identifiers.

    As you say, Clint, some bugs were fixed in A2007… but many old bugs still remain. Hope all goes well with A2007 SP1, but I’m not going to buy it before SP2. :-/

  14. kennethj says:

    The big issue with Jet is that it isn’t owned by the Access team.  The Access team does now own a clone of Jet they can change as needed.  This is good for the future of Access and will hopefully lead to a fix if deemed necessary.  I might be able to help you out with setting the process up better or figuring out what might be a little off.  I post at Utteraccess and that would be a better forum than here for help with this.  If you haven’t visited there I highly recommend it.

    Ken

  15. Vladimi­r Cvajniga says:

    Hi, Ken,

    I tried to post to Utte Access but I get: We cannot proceed. A version is required please.

    I’ve tried it twice with same result… I’ve lost my text twice. I don’t think I’m going to try it again.

  16. Clint Covington says:

    Vladimir,

    I looked into this issue with support. They were suprised to see the KB it associated with 2007. We are verifying the fix was ported from the Jet team and will update the article to remove the 2007 reference (assuming the fix was ported). Looking at the threads above, you have Jet 4.0.8618.0 but the bug was fixed by the Jet team in build 4.0.9025.0.

    Clint