I know it's not fully IT with the list, but maybe somebody can help me.

I'm dealing with this scenario: access 97 is connected through odbc to a
postgresql server. All tables are saved in postgresql and access is used
only to generated the program interface.

Everything works fines, but I'm having problems with the serial data
type. I know a serial is an integer having as default the next value of
a sequence. Since it is an integer, access does not recognize it as an
autoincrement value, and it asks for is value.

Did anyone of you already have this problem?

Thanks...

--
Non c'e' piu' forza nella normalita', c'e' solo monotonia.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFILECusbKx4ZV8clIRAs5cAJ0TQi3mYx2xkjSH9tJXH2 OXETF4fwCfeHxr
CCI2m+0r2lf4KWtlRhiLVrM=
=1fIy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Ottavio Campana <ottavio@campana.vi.it> wrote:
> I know it's not fully IT with the list, but maybe somebody can help me.
>
> I'm dealing with this scenario: access 97 is connected through odbc to a
> postgresql server. All tables are saved in postgresql and access is used
> only to generated the program interface.
>
> Everything works fines, but I'm having problems with the serial data type. I
> know a serial is an integer having as default the next value of a sequence.
> Since it is an integer, access does not recognize it as an autoincrement
> value, and it asks for is value.
>
> Did anyone of you already have this problem?

Can you feed it a value of DEFAULT???

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Ottavio Campana <ottavio@campana.vi.it> wrote:
>> I know it's not fully IT with the list, but maybe somebody can help me.
>>
>> I'm dealing with this scenario: access 97 is connected through odbc toa
>> postgresql server. All tables are saved in postgresql and access is used
>> only to generated the program interface.
>>
>> Everything works fines, but I'm having problems with the serial data type. I
>> know a serial is an integer having as default the next value of a sequence.
>> Since it is an integer, access does not recognize it as an autoincrement
>> value, and it asks for is value.
>>
>> Did anyone of you already have this problem?
>
> Can you feed it a value of DEFAULT???

I'd like to, but I don't think I could do it.

The fact is that the serial data type is in pratice an integer, and when
I also try to connect with pgadminIII I see an integer data type and not
a serial. I think that since it sees an integer, it does not understand
that it is a serial, and access does not recognize it as autoincrement.

I'm stuck at this point...

--
Non c'e' piu' forza nella normalita', c'e' solo monotonia.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFILGGGsbKx4ZV8clIRAjmkAJ90+pqf1PV8bt3ofvSb3q UH0sCpuQCfWYy6
8Ny/ZYdi1xQBudHq6rXEOsc=
=mHy3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thursday 15 May 2008 9:14 am, Ottavio Campana wrote:
> Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Ottavio Campana <ottavio@campana.vi.it>
wrote:
> >> I know it's not fully IT with the list, but maybe somebody can help me.
> >>
> >> I'm dealing with this scenario: access 97 is connected through odbc to a
> >> postgresql server. All tables are saved in postgresql and access is used
> >> only to generated the program interface.
> >>
> >> Everything works fines, but I'm having problems with the serial data
> >> type. I know a serial is an integer having as default the next value of
> >> a sequence. Since it is an integer, access does not recognize it as an
> >> autoincrement value, and it asks for is value.
> >>
> >> Did anyone of you already have this problem?
> >
> > Can you feed it a value of DEFAULT???
>
> I'd like to, but I don't think I could do it.
>
> The fact is that the serial data type is in pratice an integer, and when
> I also try to connect with pgadminIII I see an integer data type and not
> a serial. I think that since it sees an integer, it does not understand
> that it is a serial, and access does not recognize it as autoincrement.
>
> I'm stuck at this point...
Did you mark this field as the primary key when you linked the table?

--
Adrian Klaver
aklaver@comcast.net

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On Thursday 15 May 2008 11:44 pm, Ottavio Campana wrote:
> Adrian Klaver ha scritto:
> >> The fact is that the serial data type is in pratice an integer, and when
> >> I also try to connect with pgadminIII I see an integer data type and not
> >> a serial. I think that since it sees an integer, it does not understand
> >> that it is a serial, and access does not recognize it as autoincrement.
> >>
> >> I'm stuck at this point...
> >
> > Did you mark this field as the primary key when you linked the table?
>
> yes I did

Just out of curiosity, create a test table using the WITH OIDS clause and a
serial data type column along with some test columns and try to INSERT a
record.

--
Adrian Klaver
aklaver@comcast.net

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:54 AM, Ottavio Campana <ottavio@campana.vi.it> wrote:
> I'm dealing with this scenario: access 97 is connected through odbc to a
> postgresql server. All tables are saved in postgresql and access is used
> only to generated the program interface.
>
> Everything works fines, but I'm having problems with the serial data type. I
> know a serial is an integer having as default the next value of a sequence.
> Since it is an integer, access does not recognize it as an autoincrement
> value, and it asks for is value.
>
> Did anyone of you already have this problem?

Back when I was using V95, I remember having this problem and finding
a simple way to get around it. The only problem is that I can't
remember what it was. MS-Access 2003 doesn't seem to suffer from this
problem.

One brute-force method to get around it is to create a function that
uses an ADO connection to call the PostgreSQL back-end for
nextval('sequence_name'). Next using the Before_insert() event in
access, you could manually set the new id for your primary key and
complete the record insertion.

--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.

Visit the Los Angles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general