>Hi.. what Ms. Access do you mean? Ms. Access 2000? .. does my codes already correct? please inform me thank you

I don't use Access at all for production - I use the MSDE or SQL Server; my understanding is that the repair tools for MS Access require that you have the appropriate version of MS Access installed to support which ever version of the MDB files is in use - at least MS Access 97, and if the files are MS Access 2000 files, MS Access 2000. THis is not an authoritative statement; if I do small-scale, low-end database, I avoid the MDB file system like the plague; it offers very poor performance in network environments, as both the size of the file and the number of users accessing the file increases. I find the MDB structure to be extremely fragile compared to, say, VFP .DBF based databases where the indexes, data and the metadata describing the interrelations andpermanent views which provide easy access to permanently define projects and joins of a database. When I reach a point where I find that the DBF/DBC combination is affected because of the file server oriented architecture (the MDB is also a file server architecture, with no provision for having the files handled directly by a backend which provides backend services) I upsize to SQL Server or CA-Ingress, offloading database handling services to scaleable backend products that offer a wider range of services.

I won't touch MDBs as a rule - I turn down jobs where the client insists on an MDB based file architecture.