#Recordset.Delet
10-Jul-94 14:28:04
Sb: #30332-#Recordset.Delet
Fm: Roby Gamboa 74637,673
To: Israel Burman 74214,1656
I found that the query you used to obtain the record you wish to delete *must*
be indexed on a unique field. If there is any ambiguity regarding the unique
nature of the record in the return set (whether or not it really is unique),
you will receive the 'Multiple rows were updated' message, which is incorrect:
no update took place, the operation failed.
What worked for us was to designate a 'dummy' counter field and use it as the
primary key for the table. After including the appropriate member variables and
RFX routines and updating the m_nFields variable to reflect the increase in the
number of columns, our queries worked fine. There was no need to change the
queries: the proper record was returned, but now was uniquely specified by the
counter field…ambiguity (whether possible or actual) was resolved.
Roby