So happy to hear your problem is solved!   :)

Let me know any time I can help.   :)

> From: "Robert Comer" 
> Found it!  Made my Friday.
> It wasn't the SQL statement or the stored procedure that was the problem,
> but thanks Ellen, I'm putting that one in my bag of tricks for later use.
> It was not setting up the proper CursorDriver (should have been rdUseODBC,
> instead it defaulted somehow to rdUseIfNeeded in this instance.)
> - Bob Comer 
> "Robert Comer" 
wrote in message
> news:40e56598{at}w3.nls.net...
>> Okay, I got that in but the darn thing still gets the same error when
>> called, it's got to be a coding issue in the app, probably something not
> set
>> up correctly.  Maybe a default change or something as it works with an
> older
>> ODBC driver. :(
>> 
>> Just a little background, it's a VB5 (originally) using an ODBC connection
>> to a SQL Server 6.5, which in turn ODBC's to our AS/400.  This particular
>> part isn't touching the AS/400 at all.
>> 
>> - Bob Comer
>> 
>> "Ellen K"  wrote in message
>> news:509841.e20b14{at}harborwebs.com...
>> > I'm here via Dale's mirror, got stuck in sleep disconnect and now can't
>> get
>> > back to your message, but here's my reply:
>> >
>> > If you mean it all has to look like one table, that's easy, just make a
>> derived
>> > table out of it:
>> > SELECT x.* FROM
>> >   (SELECT w.WRKNO
>> >   , w.RELNO
>> >   , c.CO_ID
>> >   , c.LOTID
>> >   , s.COLOR
>> >   , CONVERT(char(6), w.WRKNO) + '  ' + c.LOTID + '  ' +
> SFC_Colors.COLOR)
>> AS
>> > LISTCOL
>> >   FROM WorkOrder w
>> >   INNER JOIN CombOrder c
>> >   ON w.WO_ID = c.WO_ID
>> >   LEFT JOIN SFC_Colors s
>> >   ON c.COLOR_ID = s.COLOR_ID
>> >   WHERE w.ACTIVE = 1
>> >   AND c.ACTIVE = 1) x
>> > ORDER BY x.WRKNO, x.LOTID
>> >
>> > (You can't put the ORDER BY in the definition of a derived table.)
>> >
>> > Note that a derived table is something SQL Server really likes and can
> use
>> very
>> > efficiently, it's not at all the same thing as a subquery in terms of
>> > performance.
>> >
>> > Whether you can open a cursor on it is another question though.
>> Personally I
>> > don't use cursors so I'm not knowledgable about their ins and outs.
>> Cursors
>> > are considered not really "SQL-ish" (for lack of a
better word) and are
>> also
>> > reputed to have a really bad effect on performance.  Are you sure a
> cursor
>> is
>> > the best way to solve your problem?
>> >
>> > P.S.  I'm writing this from Montreal, this is the first time I've
> checked
>> in in
>> > several days... I feel bad that I wasn't there when you first
asked your
>> > question.
>> 
>> 

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5