Microsoft ACCESS 2003 HELP!!!!

have a major problem. I am developing a database for a client that contains
over 302 tables, all of which have thousands of rows. 301 of these tables
need to be linked to the parent table, and all have the same primary key.
However, I have recieved that evil error message that only 32 tables can be
indexed. I have searched and searched, but cannot find a solution to this.
I am desperate for any suggestions, even if it means taking avenues other
than ACCESS 2003. The only requirements are that the database has the
ability to be online, collecting data from other parties via some sort of
form. Also, these tables must have full capabilities to be edited and
controlled, not read-only. CAN ANYONE HELP ME??? There is a huge deadline
coming in hours. Thanks!

Access is not very robust - especially with a large number of tables and/or
a complex schema (such as it is).
You didn't mention whether free was a consideration, but MySQL might be
worth looking at. It has quirks too, but a zillion people use it (since it
is free).

HTH


"Jana" <Jana@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0513215C-AABB-41FB-822A-62783C1D53CB@microsoft.com...
> have a major problem. I am developing a database for a client that
> contains
> over 302 tables, all of which have thousands of rows. 301 of these tables
> need to be linked to the parent table, and all have the same primary key.
> However, I have recieved that evil error message that only 32 tables can
> be
> indexed. I have searched and searched, but cannot find a solution to
> this.
> I am desperate for any suggestions, even if it means taking avenues other
> than ACCESS 2003. The only requirements are that the database has the
> ability to be online, collecting data from other parties via some sort of
> form. Also, these tables must have full capabilities to be edited and
> controlled, not read-only. CAN ANYONE HELP ME??? There is a huge
> deadline
> coming in hours. Thanks!

I'm guessing your deadline came and passed and all hell broke loose?



"Kerry Liles" <me@completely.invalid> wrote in message
news:Ohnm9Tk0IHA.416@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Access is not very robust - especially with a large number of tables
> and/or a complex schema (such as it is).
> You didn't mention whether free was a consideration, but MySQL might be
> worth looking at. It has quirks too, but a zillion people use it (since
> it is free).
>
> HTH
>
>
> "Jana" <Jana@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0513215C-AABB-41FB-822A-62783C1D53CB@microsoft.com...
>> have a major problem. I am developing a database for a client that
>> contains
>> over 302 tables, all of which have thousands of rows. 301 of these
>> tables
>> need to be linked to the parent table, and all have the same primary key.
>> However, I have recieved that evil error message that only 32 tables can
>> be
>> indexed. I have searched and searched, but cannot find a solution to
>> this.
>> I am desperate for any suggestions, even if it means taking avenues other
>> than ACCESS 2003. The only requirements are that the database has the
>> ability to be online, collecting data from other parties via some sort of
>> form. Also, these tables must have full capabilities to be edited and
>> controlled, not read-only. CAN ANYONE HELP ME??? There is a huge
>> deadline
>> coming in hours. Thanks!
>
>