[Mist]

I have isolated the record I want to delete in a recordset (Don't ask how, that code is messy, and I'm working on cleaning it up and streamlining it a bit more).

Now I want to delete the said record. Is there any easy way to do this (By issuing some command to the recordset object)?

I already know you can use the ADODB.Connection object's Execute-method & and SQL-statement to delete the record, but that'll increase the workload on the server.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

-Mist

[Mist]

Hmm...

I found out how. It was really fairly simple...

You just type 'RS.Delete' when you are at the correct record. (But remember to check that the record is indeed the one you want to delete. I learned that the hard way...)

-Mist

[Quentin]

learned that the hard way? uhh.... ;)

i was shocked finding out that rs.delete works without rs.update needed.... dammit :)

if you have more than one record selected (e.g. all entries with name 'Quentin' in it), you can delete them as shown here:

do while not rs.eof
 rs.delete
 rs.movenext
loop

please don't forget to include the rs.movenext.... i don't know how many times i produced code without movenext ehehe :) bad luck...

kind regards
quentin

[klewlis]

just out of curiosity, why would you need to delete records from the recordset? why wouldn't you refine your query instead to not include those records?

[Mist]

We want to delete stuff from a recordset, because when we delete it from the recordset, it doesn't only delete from the recordset, but from the entire database. That's the clue ;)

-Mist

[klewlis]

oh yes, of course. I'm not used to thinking of recordsets in that way, so that didn't occur to me. Even so, why not use a delete query? I guess it would save you a trip to the db in some instances, but I don't think I've ever had a situation where I needed to do that. *ponder*

[Mist]

Mainly because you can make exception code if the record you need to delete isn't there... That's why. If you run a simple DELETE-command, you risk the page throwing up a pile of, ermh, well, something, instead of progressing along nicely and showing a user-friendly error message...

[klewlis]

oh ok, that works. :)

I wonder why I've never come across that yet. I think that whenever I'm deleting records, I *know* that they're there so I don't have to have it check (ie: I generally am deleting a record that has been retrieved already by that file, so it must exist).