linking to backend: UNC vs drive letter

[jfp]

I seem to recall various comments in the past here re the use of UNC
(\\Server\Path) vs the easier to use drive letters for linking to an
Access database on a network server. Does it matter ?

(Access 2002 aka XP, either real version or ODE, on the front end.)

 

[Rick Brandt]

I seem to recall various comments in the past here re the use of UNC
(\\Server\Path) vs the easier to use drive letters for linking to an
Access database on a network server. Does it matter ?

(Access 2002 aka XP, either real version or ODE, on the front end.)

The advantage of the UNC path is that it works on every PC on your network
without having to manually map a drive on all of them. Also; what if you use K
and one of your users has already used K for a mapping of his own? Are you
going to force him to change it?

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

The advantage of the UNC path is that it works on every PC on your network
without having to manually map a drive on all of them. Also; what if you use K
and one of your users has already used K for a mapping of his own? Are you
going to force him to change it?

Just to play devil's advocate...

On the other hand, the advantage of using a mapped drive letter (if you're
in an environment where everyone's drive letters automatically get mapped as
part of the logon script) is that you can easily have separate test,
acceptance and production versions of your backend, and change which one
you're working against simply by remapping your drive, without having to
make any change whatsoever to your application. It also means that you can
promote an application to production without having to touch the
application: a major consideration in large corporations.