"KenSheridan via AccessMonster.com" u51882@uwe wrote in message
news:a25b114e44fa5@uwe...

Arvin's solution, while seeding the start number, has the disadvantage, as
Keith has pointed out, of not guaranteeing an unbroken sequence (or a
sequence at all for that matter), for which an autonumber should never be
used, an autonumber being intended to ensure arbitrary unique values and
nothing else (which is presumably why Microsoft changed it from 'counter'
after version 2).

If an incremental autonumber is used, unless a number is deleted, or someone
reseeds the field again with a higher number, there will not be an unbroken
sequence. If you mean that a number can be "lost" by starting and discarding
a record, yes that can happen, but that's the same as deleting a record.
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access
http://www.accessmvp.com