Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

Conversion of 2.0 database to 2002? 2003?

Discussion in 'Information Technology' started by Louise54, Jul 28, 2006.

  1. Louise54

    Louise54
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    We have 10 people working out of a back-end 2.0 database (front-end is 2000).
    Over the years I've resisted converting the 2.0 database as I've been told
    that 2.0 was faster. Now I'm thinking I really should get this done, but
    don't want to affect the speed. Which version should I go to? There is
    nothing very "fancy" about the tables, forms, reports, etc. I've always just
    used macros - no vb coding. Also, should I do the conversion in "steps" (2.0
    to 97, then to 2000, etc.) or just go straight from 2.0 to whichever version
    is decided? My biggest fear is losing the autonumber fields....
    Thanks ahead for any information.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Allen Browne

    Allen Browne
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Microsoft has an Access 2.0 Converter for Access 2003 at:
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...F8-F3AB-41E9-902A-2255A66E1C4A&displaylang=en

    You will not lose the data in the AutoNumber fields, but you may find that
    after the upgrate the autonumbers act weird (e.g. assigning wild numbers or
    negatives.) If you do strike this, you can use the code in this article to
    fix it:
    Fixing AutoNumbers when Access assigns negatives or duplicates
    at:
    http://allenbrowne.com/ser-40.html

    In any case, you do not lose the A2.0 file. The converted file has a new
    name, so there is no risk involved.

    You may also need to sort out your references after conversion:
    http://allenbrowne.com/ser-38.html

    More info on converting to A2003:
    http://allenbrowne.com/ser-48.html

    --
    Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
    Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
    Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

    "Louise54" <Louise54@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:FB82F375-40B2-4318-AAFC-AD2655C2E711@microsoft.com...
    > We have 10 people working out of a back-end 2.0 database (front-end is
    > 2000).
    > Over the years I've resisted converting the 2.0 database as I've been told
    > that 2.0 was faster. Now I'm thinking I really should get this done, but
    > don't want to affect the speed. Which version should I go to? There is
    > nothing very "fancy" about the tables, forms, reports, etc. I've always
    > just
    > used macros - no vb coding. Also, should I do the conversion in "steps"
    > (2.0
    > to 97, then to 2000, etc.) or just go straight from 2.0 to whichever
    > version
    > is decided? My biggest fear is losing the autonumber fields....
    > Thanks ahead for any information.
     
  4. Louise54

    Louise54
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    THank you Allen. So, are you saying that I can do this in one jump? What
    about if I wanted to convert to 2000 or 2002? (not everyone is currently on
    2003).
    Thanks ahead.

    "Allen Browne" wrote:

    > Microsoft has an Access 2.0 Converter for Access 2003 at:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...F8-F3AB-41E9-902A-2255A66E1C4A&displaylang=en
    >
    > You will not lose the data in the AutoNumber fields, but you may find that
    > after the upgrate the autonumbers act weird (e.g. assigning wild numbers or
    > negatives.) If you do strike this, you can use the code in this article to
    > fix it:
    > Fixing AutoNumbers when Access assigns negatives or duplicates
    > at:
    > http://allenbrowne.com/ser-40.html
    >
    > In any case, you do not lose the A2.0 file. The converted file has a new
    > name, so there is no risk involved.
    >
    > You may also need to sort out your references after conversion:
    > http://allenbrowne.com/ser-38.html
    >
    > More info on converting to A2003:
    > http://allenbrowne.com/ser-48.html
    >
    > --
    > Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
    > Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
    > Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.
    >
    > "Louise54" <Louise54@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:FB82F375-40B2-4318-AAFC-AD2655C2E711@microsoft.com...
    > > We have 10 people working out of a back-end 2.0 database (front-end is
    > > 2000).
    > > Over the years I've resisted converting the 2.0 database as I've been told
    > > that 2.0 was faster. Now I'm thinking I really should get this done, but
    > > don't want to affect the speed. Which version should I go to? There is
    > > nothing very "fancy" about the tables, forms, reports, etc. I've always
    > > just
    > > used macros - no vb coding. Also, should I do the conversion in "steps"
    > > (2.0
    > > to 97, then to 2000, etc.) or just go straight from 2.0 to whichever
    > > version
    > > is decided? My biggest fear is losing the autonumber fields....
    > > Thanks ahead for any information.

    >
    >
    >
     
  5. Allen Browne

    Allen Browne
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    By default, Access 2003 creates new files in the 2000 format, so that should
    be no problem.

    --
    Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
    Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
    Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

    "Louise54" <Louise54@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:E7411405-33CA-4FFC-9098-F2FFE1826750@microsoft.com...
    > THank you Allen. So, are you saying that I can do this in one jump? What
    > about if I wanted to convert to 2000 or 2002? (not everyone is currently
    > on
    > 2003).
    > Thanks ahead.
    >
    > "Allen Browne" wrote:
    >
    >> Microsoft has an Access 2.0 Converter for Access 2003 at:
    >>
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...F8-F3AB-41E9-902A-2255A66E1C4A&displaylang=en
    >>
    >> You will not lose the data in the AutoNumber fields, but you may find
    >> that
    >> after the upgrate the autonumbers act weird (e.g. assigning wild numbers
    >> or
    >> negatives.) If you do strike this, you can use the code in this article
    >> to
    >> fix it:
    >> Fixing AutoNumbers when Access assigns negatives or duplicates
    >> at:
    >> http://allenbrowne.com/ser-40.html
    >>
    >> In any case, you do not lose the A2.0 file. The converted file has a new
    >> name, so there is no risk involved.
    >>
    >> You may also need to sort out your references after conversion:
    >> http://allenbrowne.com/ser-38.html
    >>
    >> More info on converting to A2003:
    >> http://allenbrowne.com/ser-48.html
    >>
    >> "Louise54" <Louise54@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    >> news:FB82F375-40B2-4318-AAFC-AD2655C2E711@microsoft.com...
    >> > We have 10 people working out of a back-end 2.0 database (front-end is
    >> > 2000).
    >> > Over the years I've resisted converting the 2.0 database as I've been
    >> > told
    >> > that 2.0 was faster. Now I'm thinking I really should get this done,
    >> > but
    >> > don't want to affect the speed. Which version should I go to? There is
    >> > nothing very "fancy" about the tables, forms, reports, etc. I've always
    >> > just
    >> > used macros - no vb coding. Also, should I do the conversion in "steps"
    >> > (2.0
    >> > to 97, then to 2000, etc.) or just go straight from 2.0 to whichever
    >> > version
    >> > is decided? My biggest fear is losing the autonumber fields....
    >> > Thanks ahead for any information.
     

Share This Page