Mailing-List: contact user-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Users List" <user@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Subject: General Database Question
To: user@commons.apache.org
Message-ID: 
 <OF5D0BD500.C9337476-ON852574C2.003D9944-852574C2.003FB8A6@xtl.com>
From: Patrick.Grimard@xtl.com
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:36:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
	Boundary="0__=0ABBFE51DFAE1FD48f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBFE51DFAE1FD4"
Content-Disposition: inline

--0__=0ABBFE51DFAE1FD48f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBFE51DFAE1FD4
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


I have a process that I've archived into a jar file.  That jar file gets called
on a schedule, on a Windows machine.  Part of my process queries 3 tables in an
MS Access database to extract the data and dump it to a DB2 database.  I've
noticed that the last few times it has ran, it always returns 20000 records from
one of the tables.  I've seen that particular table have fewer records, like in
the 2000 to 3000 range, as much as 15000+, but now it keeps returning exactly
20000.  I didn't like the fact that the number was so round, so I created a test
class that does a simple "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM" and I pass the table name as a
parameter to the class.  I was shocked to see that the result was in fact 20000
for the particular table in question.

So I guess my question is, could the Access database be locked down to only hold
a maximum of 20000 records in a given table?  Or is there something else going
on?
(Embedded image moved to file: pic07711.jpg)

--0__=0ABBFE51DFAE1FD48f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBFE51DFAE1FD4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
--0__=0ABBFE51DFAE1FD48f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBFE51DFAE1FD4--