|
In the query design grid you can add a table more than once. Access
will call the second table "Project_managers1" or some such. I like to
alias all my tables anyway, because the code references are easier. I
would call the first Project Manager table p1 and the second one p2.
(Select Proprties in the query design grid and add an alias). Once you
have the second table in the design grid, you can create a second join to
the
project_manager.assistant_manager field.
BTW, if you
adopt certain naming conventions you will have an easier life later on -
especially if you decide to upgrade to another dbms like SQL
Server:
- don't use spaces in table or field names
- use
lowercase for table and field names (this is because SQL commands are
written in uppercase following the ANSI standard - so your code is easier
to read),
- give your tables meaningful names; "project_managers" is
fine but "front_end" could make it difficult for whoever comes after you
to interpret your
design.
HTH
"Larry
H" <larryh@appliedimage.com> wrote in message
news:95po9a$qmb$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> I have 2
tables, FRONT END and PROJECT MANAGERS. The FRONT END table
> has 2
fields, one called PROJECT MANAGER and another called ASSISTANT
>
MANAGER. Both fields pluck their values from a "combo box" which
>
extracts the info from the aformentioned PROJECT MANAGERS field.
The
> table stores the "autonumber" (in both fields) from the
PROJECT
> MANAGERS table corresponding to the name
chosen.
>
> In a query I have, the trick is for the query to
match up the number
> stored in the FRONT END table and match it up
with the name in the
> PROJECT MANAGERS table which contains the
same number in
> its "autonumber" field. I have no difficulty doing
this with only the
> PROJECT MANAGER field by itself, but doing it
simultaneously with the
> ASSISTANT MANAGER field is causing some
difficulties.
>
> I am thinking the trick is to build 1 query
handling one field, and
> then a 2nd query plucking those values
(using the "*") from the 1st
> query and then matching up the other
field. This does seem to work,
> though it doesn't allow any entries
to be added to this field.
>
> Is this the only way to make
this work, or are there better ways--
> particularly having 1 query
handle both matchups straight from the 2
> tables?
>
>
Larry R Harrison Jr
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
|
