Big Problem with MVF and Junction Table

Copper Contributor

Hi Everyone,

I think I have screwed up. As I have previously talked about, I have a many to many relationship. I was originally using MVF, until a few members on here told me to use a junction table. Here is the problem. I didn't actually remove the MVF, and that is what the database has been running on. I have started doing queries, after I made all my forms. Do I, A. Continue with MVF and try to figure out how to do queries that way (Will need a lot of help from this community and others) or B. How do I remove the MVF, whilst still using the Junction Table. If B is the better option, how do I use it in a form? I will attach my database. I really need some help!

5 Replies
You have both MVFs and attachment fields (another type of MVF)
Suggest you get rid of BOTH before you go any further - if you don't you will regret it.

As you don't have much data (yet), its probably easiest to just make a backup copy of the existing tables for use later, modify the structure of the main tables removing MVFs and attachments then transfer the relevant data. Hope that makes sense
Hi IslaDogs, This is just a project, it is not going to be used to input or store data, if that's why you are warning against MVF Fields. The size of the database is not really going to change.
You have already entered data, so I don't understand your comment.
I am strongly recommending you abandon attachment fields due to file bloat but even more important is the fact that both MVFs and attachment fields are so difficult to query.
In case you haven't seen it already, please read my article
That was an incredibly helpful article, thank you! I do not intend to query the attachment field, and I am not particularly concerned about File Bloat, though this would be an issue for larger databases. If I do have to query an MVF field, I will revise what was discussed in the article.

Your choice entirely.
However, if you don't intend to get rid of the MVFs or attachment fields, I do wonder what the point of this thread actually is.