>Interesting. SQL Server -> Access is a done deal, so that is no problem.
>There are scripts already to move from Access -> PGSQL. (Not usually using
>ODBC; most instead generate an SQL dump, which you can then load. I think
>that's even nicer.)
>
>I guess it hangs on how much of the real stuff is lost between SQL Server
>and Access; they're rather mismatched systems.
I did a project with Access and VB a few years back and ran into a
limit to the number of fields Access could have in a table. I don't
remember the exact number of fields but it was < 256.
While this is not a problem for most instances but in my case I had
to deal with a legacy system where some tables had >300 fields per
table. There were other nightmares but I won't digress. I just wanted
to point out one limitation I was aware of for this hopscotch
technique of harvesting data.
Scott
________________________________________
Scott Sandeman-Allen
Roderick Scott Corporation
Edmonton, Alberta. Canada
