title: Nullable bool fields in MS Access linked tables
body: <p>Looks like I'm not the only one out there with this issue, but there doesn't seem to be an anwwer to this problem.</p>
  
  <p>I'm working in Access 2010, using a linked table to an SQL Server 2005 database (through an SQL Server ODBC pipe). In that table, one of the boolean fields is marked as nullable, and several records in this table do in fact have a null in the field. So far so good.</p>
  
  <p>In comes Access, and as soon as you open the linked table, Access shows a 0 (false) instead of a blank cell (problem #1). And if you try to modify anything in the record, you get an error message saying the record was modified by someone else and your changes cannot be saved. This last problem is due to the fact that Access doesn't tolerate nullable bool fields, and goes a bit nuts when trying to save the value.</p>
  
  <p>My research shows that this could have something to do with Access using Jet in the background to connect to the SQL Server database, and Jet apparently does not support nullable bools. There doesn't seem to be a way to configure Jet to support this (although perhaps there is, if you're connecting in code). I also thought MS was replacing Jet with another technology used in Office 2010 (ACE, I think), but cannot tell if this is what's actually being used by Access. In either case, I can find no configurable options regarding nullable bools.</p>
  
  <p>Finally, this issue seems to have been brought up to MS a short while ago, but there's no answer on their end: <a href="https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/617339/null-bit-fields-produce-spurious-ms-access-errors-when-using-the-native-odbc-driver?wa=wsignin1.0#tabs" rel="noreferrer">https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/617339/null-bit-fields-produce-spurious-ms-access-errors-when-using-the-native-odbc-driver?wa=wsignin1.0#tabs</a></p>
  
  <p>I'm wondering if anyone else out there has run into this and found a solution. And before you suggest it, taking the nullable option off and setting all nulls to 'false' is not really an option in our case. For us, null is actually a valid state and very different from 'false.</p>
  
  <p>Thx!</p>