Duplicate databases being created on exit

[D Stretton]

We have a database on a network. On one PC now each time the database is
opened then closed a new (duplicate) database is created with the name db1,
db2 etc. This database has been used for years, the PC has been used for
years, never happened before. It is the PC that is causing the problem as it
doesn't happen on other PCs and it does happen if different users log on to
the PC in question. No work has been done on this PC recently. The only
change that has occured is that the database was split into a front end and
back end last week. The FE and BE are both on the network - following advice
given in a previous question this was preferable to having a database not
split at all.

Does anyone know how I can stop this happening?

Thank you in advance.

 

[John Vinson]

We have a database on a network. On one PC now each time the database is
opened then closed a new (duplicate) database is created with the name db1,
db2 etc. This database has been used for years, the PC has been used for
years, never happened before. It is the PC that is causing the problem as it
doesn't happen on other PCs and it does happen if different users log on to
the PC in question. No work has been done on this PC recently. The only
change that has occured is that the database was split into a front end and
back end last week. The FE and BE are both on the network - following advice
given in a previous question this was preferable to having a database not
split at all.

What's happening, I'd guess, is that you have the backend set to
Compact on Close; and that the user of this PC does not have Delete
privileges on the folder containing the backend. When Access compacts
the database, it copies the .mdb file to a new file named db1.mdb (or
2 or 3 if the filename is already in use); then deletes the database
and renames the dbX.mdb file. If it's unable to delete the backend you
get left with the db1.

Check the user's permissions on the folder containing the backend.
And, if at ALL possible, move the frontend to the user's PC; at the
very least, provide each user with their own private folder containing
their own copy of the frontend. Sharing a frontend among many users is
even worse than sharing a unitary database!

John W. Vinson[MVP]

 

[D Stretton]

Hello John

Thanks for the suggestion, yes I do have BE set to run Compact and Repair on
exit but I don't think it is to do with permissions as it happens to
different users on the same PC and the permissions are set to users, not PC
and I can't see any difference in permissions. Any other suggestions? If I
can't discover the problem is it OK to simply delete the duplicated dbx.mdb
file or are you saying this is the one to keep?

Can you please clarify for me your comment regarding splitting the database
and keeping the FE and BE on the network? I posted a question on 14th July
2005 and received a reply advising that it was preferable to split the
database and keep the FE and BE on the network rather than having multiple
users using an unsplit database on a network. Which is correct? If it is
worse to have FE and BE of database on network over having an unsplit
database on the network can you please explain why?

Many thanks

 

[John Vinson]

Hello John

Thanks for the suggestion, yes I do have BE set to run Compact and Repair on
exit but I don't think it is to do with permissions as it happens to
different users on the same PC and the permissions are set to users, not PC
and I can't see any difference in permissions. Any other suggestions? If I
can't discover the problem is it OK to simply delete the duplicated dbx.mdb
file or are you saying this is the one to keep?

By all means delete the dbx.mdb files. At the very worst you'll be
dealing with an uncompacted database - not a damaged one, hopefully.
You might want to turn off Compact on Close and instead use the
Windows Scheduler to periodically compact the database in "off hours".

Can you please clarify for me your comment regarding splitting the database
and keeping the FE and BE on the network? I posted a question on 14th July
2005 and received a reply advising that it was preferable to split the
database and keep the FE and BE on the network rather than having multiple
users using an unsplit database on a network. Which is correct? If it is
worse to have FE and BE of database on network over having an unsplit
database on the network can you please explain why?

Ideal:
Split application with a single backend on a shared drive, with a
copy of the frontend (.mde preferably) on each user's desktop.

Satisfactory:
Split application with a single backend on a shared drive, with a
copy of the frontend (.mde preferably) in a user-specific folder on
the same server as the backend. (This is actually preferred if users
must connect over a terminal server such as Citrix).

Problematic:
Single application with many users opening the same unitary
database.

Even worse:
Split application with a single backend on a shared drive, and a
single frontend on a shared drive with multiple users opening it. This
combines the disadvantages (performance, mainly) of split applications
with the disadvantages (performance, bloat, risk of corruption,
inability to make design changes) of a unitary application.

John W. Vinson[MVP]

 

[D Stretton]

Hi John

Thanks for the information, very useful.

Seem to have sorted the original problem, you led me in the right direction.
It seems even though I had selected to Compact on Close for the database,
this was not selected when the database was opened on the 'problem' PC. Have
ticked it now and duplicate databases are no longer created.

Regards

 

[John Vinson]

It seems even though I had selected to Compact on Close for the database,
this was not selected when the database was opened on the 'problem' PC. Have
ticked it now and duplicate databases are no longer created.

I find that very puzzling!!! If you don't have Compact on Close
ticked, the dbX databases would not be created in the first place, I'd
expect!

But so long as it's working for you...

John W. Vinson[MVP]