Received: from u1.abs.net (root@u1.abs.net [207.114.0.131]) by hub.org (8.8.8/8.7.5) with ESMTP id NAA04884 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:44:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from insightdist.com (nobody@localhost) by u1.abs.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with UUCP id NAA04141 for pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:14:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: u1.abs.net: nobody set sender to insightdist.com!daveh using -f Received: by insightdist.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14370; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:56:28 -0400 Received: from daveh by ceodev (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA69072; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:56:11 -0400 Message-Id: <3544B82F.A48F95B6@insightdist.com> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:54:08 -0400 From: David Hartwig Organization: Insight Distribution Systems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Sbragion Denis Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Odbc and Visual Basic References: <3.0.5.32.19980427102627.008acaa0@MBox.InfoTecna.com> <3.0.5.32.19980427182218.008412d0@MBox.InfoTecna.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------FF24E9268321557CD9FA8F3C" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------FF24E9268321557CD9FA8F3C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit See Byron's posting on this subject. We are getting some interesting result from our yet-to-be-posted hacks. The cool part is that, MS Access no longer requests the user to tag the primary key at link time. The downside, though, is that it has a higher potential for exposing a known bug in the backend's optimizer. The bug has to with multipart keys and the large numbers of ANDs and ORs generated in a single statement while browsing tables. Sbragion Denis wrote: > Hello, > > At 08.14 27/04/98 -0400, David Hartwig wrote: > >Here is an excerpt from the soon to be published ODBC FAQ. > > > >How do I get my application to recognize primary keys? > > > >SQLPrimaryKeys() is implemented in the driver. As of the driver's > release, however, > ... > > Unfortunately VB 5.0 seems to ignore the SQLPrimaryKey() call and insists > looking for a unique index. It was the first thing I tried when I saw the > announce for the support of that call. I also know that the concept of > Primary Key is different from the concept of Unique Index (though on most > database system, including PostgreSQL, the Primary Key concept is > implemented using unique indexes), and using the SQLPrimaryKey() call would > be The Right Way To Do Things (tm), but as long as Microsoft doesn't > understand it... I don't know what would have happened if the ODBC > interface specification have come from someone else than Microsoft itself... > --------------FF24E9268321557CD9FA8F3C Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for David Hartwig Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf" begin: vcard fn: David Hartwig n: Hartwig;David email;internet: daveh@insightdist.com x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard --------------FF24E9268321557CD9FA8F3C--