Simple way of storing Access booleans (Yes/No) fields - Mailing list pgsql-odbc

Hi,<br /><br /> PG version 7.4 and Access version 2003.<br /><br /> Its the old Access boolean issue which needs as
simplean answer as possible?<br /><br /><br /> I have a client where many users were running off the same Access
databasewhich obviously got corrupted and recently failed completely.<br /><br /> After finding a backup the data has
beenmoved to a Postgresql DB running on a Debian stable server.<br /><br /> The data was exported via ODBC and I've
tidiedup the autonumber-to-sequence issue.  The original Access tables were renamed to tablebnname_old and the new
Postgresqltables have been set up as linked tables with the original names.  Most of the application is working
fine.<br/><br /> Seems like only one issue remains.<br /><br /> On a couple of forms there are check boxes and radio
buttonswhich linked originally to Yes/No (i.e. Boolean) fields in the original Access table.<br /><br /> I have a
fairlyfree hand to sort this out - and there are only 4 tables which contain boolean fields and I can alter the Access
applicationas I see fit.<br /><br /> There are quite a few queries (dozens) but again I can ask them to cut them down
andre-write needed queries if necessary.<br /><br /> What is the simplest way forward?<br /><br /> What should the ODBC
connectionbe set as?<br /><br /> Here are some possible scenarios.<br /><br /> 1. Should I set the fields to be int2
datatype and then set the ODBC driver to not treat bools as char but treat -1 as true.  <br /><br /> Will queries
writtenin Access then run correctly?  I thought I'd tried this and it didn't work possibly because I did not relink the
table.<br/><br /> 2. If I simply uncheck the treat bools as char option will the data be saved correctly as booleans -
willthe ODBC driver be ok with the data - i.e. reading and writing.<br /><br /> 3. Should I simply set the field as a
char(1)and then in Access somehow or other set the check boxes to save the data as 't' or 'f'.  How would the control
dowith reading the data.<br /><br /> 4. I understand there may be some extra functions which may be added to PG to get
Accessplay properly - is there a simple function which can be added.  Is there a well documented, proven and
establishedmethod to acheive this.<br /><br /> 5. Have these methods been 'tried and tested'<br /><br /><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-docs@postgresql.org/msg01563.html">http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-docs@postgresql.org/msg01563.html</a><br
/><aclass="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://community.seattleserver.com/viewtopic.php?p=8&sid=3add118a6924da03531fcbbbcc2c3ca8">http://community.seattleserver.com/viewtopic.php?p=8&sid=3add118a6924da03531fcbbbcc2c3ca8</a><br
/><aclass="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.mrayyan.com/?p=42">http://www.mrayyan.com/?p=42</a><br /><br /> 6.
Changethe check boxes to combo boxes - the form is horribly cluttered but the following seems like a simple answer.<br
/><br/><pre><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The way I have handled this is to avoid check boxes and use a
combobox 
 
instead. I supply the values as True;1 ,False;0 and bind the field to the 
second value of each pair. To make things easier for data entry I hide the 
second column by giving it a width of 0".  In my DSN settings I check bool as 
char and uncheck true as -1. 
-- 
Adrian Klaver    


aklaver ( at ) comcast ( dot ) net</font></pre><br /> There are however dozens of queries and many of them use booleans
whichthen may not work - however, if needed I can ask the client to remove the unneeded queries and I could then
re-writethe existing queries to take into account the new field.<br /><br /> Maybe I should create the field as int2
andin the combo box have the bound fields as -1 (label True) and 0 (label False).  Maybe this way the existing Access
querieswould work ok without changes?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> Any thoughts would be gratefully received.<br /><br
/>Kevin<br />