Search results for query: *

Here is what wound up working: I made a second query using the union query and the table containing the un-truncated memo field, everything in the same order only pulling the memo fields from the source rather than from the union query. This gave me too many records, so I then used group by and...

Yes, I have tried that and it still truncates field4 and field8 if they are over 255. but it is still not truncated in the source queries just when it comes out of the union query.

here is what it looks like, i am not super skilled at sql. SELECT [query1].[field1], [query1].[field2], [query1].[field3], [query1].[field4], [query1].[field5], [query1].[field6], [query1].[field7], [query1].[field8], [query1].[field9], [query1].[field10] From [query1] union SELECT...

Usually I put first in the total column of the memo field that is being truncated, I think that is the case for all of the source queries here that decided to truncate my memo field.

I have a large union query (joining 20+ queries) that is doing exactly what I want only it is truncating one of the memo fields. These fields are not truncated in the source queries. Each one of the 20+ queries returns values for different sets of scenarios and then the union query combines...

Thanks, that worked great, I was hoping at first that I was going to get away with out doing anything with sql but I learned what I needed to and it did not hurt. Thanks again.

I have 11 queries that all have the same data structure but arrive at their contents differently because they are all built for different scenarios/instances that I am dealing with. The content of each query is structured that each could be exported to excel and appended to each other...