Multiple Users Enviroment

[AccessHelp]

Good morning,

I have a database which will be used by more than one user. I will have the
Design Master copy in my network private drive and a replica copy in the
shared drive. Then I will have multiple copies of replicas in each user's
workstation.

Periodically, I will syn between copies in the shared drive and the user's
workstation. Then I will syn the copy in the shared drive with my Design
Master copy.

Are these steps feasible for the mulit-users database? Any recommendation
is welcomed.

Thanks.

 

[Kevin3NF]

Are you replicating the front-end? Its been awhile, but I recall the
general opinion that that was a really bad idea.

If your goal is easily populate out new front-ends, there are easier ways...

--
Kevin Hill
President
3NF Consulting

www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm

 

[AccessHelp]

I am not familiar with the term "replicating the front-end". What is it?

Thanks.

 

[Lynn Trapp]

If you don't know what he means by the term "replicating the front-end" then
that probably indicates that you have not split your database. If that is
the case, then you are replicating the application objects -- forms,
reports, etc -- and that is a very bad idea. You need to split the database
and replicate the table data only.

--
Lynn Trapp
MS Access MVP
www.ltcomputerdesigns.com
Access Security: www.ltcomputerdesigns.com/Security.htm
Jeff Conrad's Access Junkie List:
http://home.bendbroadband.com/conradsystems/accessjunkie.html

 

[AccessHelp]

Thanks Lynn. Why would I want to split the database? If I split the
database (one tables only and one everything else), are the users still going
to use the database? I am still new to this subject. Please tell me more.

All I am trying to do is I have a database for billing. The users will
import the timesheets (from Excel via macro) into the database and do the
billing in the database. More than one user may be using the database at the
same time. If I just have a copy of database in a shared drive, only one
user will be able to use it.

Thanks.

 

[Lynn Trapp]

You're welcome. Well, if you are going to use replication, you want to split
the database so you won't risk corrupting your forms and reports. Also, it
is just simply a good idea to split a database that is going to be used by
multiple users. The users will each have a copy of the frontend (the file
with the forms, reports, etc.) and that frontend will have linked tables
that are linked to the backend. There is a database splitter wizard that can
do this for you. However, you need to go back to your original database and
split it and, then, do your replication of the backend only.

--
Lynn Trapp
MS Access MVP
www.ltcomputerdesigns.com
Access Security: www.ltcomputerdesigns.com/Security.htm
Jeff Conrad's Access Junkie List:
http://home.bendbroadband.com/conradsystems/accessjunkie.html

 

[John Vinson]

If I just have a copy of database in a shared drive, only one
user will be able to use it.

That statement is *simply incorrect*. Access is a multiuser database
environment, out of the box.

"Splitting" is a good idea - it means that you should have one
database file containing the Tables, on a shared drive; each user
should have their own copy of the "frontend" containing the forms,
reports, etc. with links to the tables in the backend.

Database Replication is complex and rather hard to manage, and is not
appropriate for this situation. It's needed when you have users who
are not sharing a network (say one user at the office and another
traveller using the database on a laptop); it lets you keep two
backends (containing, again, just the tables) synchronized. If all
your users have access to the shared backend over a reasonably fast,
stable LAN then replication is just a lot of extra work for no
benefit.

See http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/splitapp/index.htm for a thorough
overview of the database splitting issue.

John W. Vinson[MVP]

 

[AccessHelp]

Lynn,

Thanks again. I do have a few more questions to clarify.

If I link FE table with BE table, when one person accesses Table A thru a
form (for example), the other person is not going to access the same Table A
thru the same form or any other form?

Will the replication cause corrupt the forms & reports? I thought
replication allows users to have their own copy and to do whatever they want
to do without concerning about table being locked. Then I can sync them back
to my Design Master. In addition, whenever I make changes to the design of a
form or any additions, I can sync them back to replicas to reflect those
changes. Am I correct? Am I missing something?

Again, thanks for your help and patient.

 

[Lynn Trapp]

If I link FE table with BE table, when one person accesses Table A thru a

form (for example), the other person is not going to access the same Table
A
thru the same form or any other form?

When you split a database, there is only one copy of the BE. The FE table is
just a pointer to that BE table and, when users make changes to their linked
table in the FE, those changes are all goign to the same table.

Will the replication cause corrupt the forms & reports? I thought
replication allows users to have their own copy and to do whatever they
want
to do without concerning about table being locked. Then I can sync them
back
to my Design Master. In addition, whenever I make changes to the design
of a
form or any additions, I can sync them back to replicas to reflect those
changes. Am I correct? Am I missing something?

Yes, replication has been known to cause corruption to the form and report
objects of a database. In theory, what you say is correct, but the Access
replication model was never designed for use with reports and forms, and
other objects. It was designed for DATA ONLY. Also, as John Vinson said,
replication is likely not the best solution for your situation. Unless you
have mobile users who are working in an "unconnected" environment, it is a
case of overkill.

--
Lynn Trapp
MS Access MVP
www.ltcomputerdesigns.com
Access Security: www.ltcomputerdesigns.com/Security.htm
Jeff Conrad's Access Junkie List:
http://home.bendbroadband.com/conradsystems/accessjunkie.html

 

[John Vinson]

If I link FE table with BE table, when one person accesses Table A thru a
form (for example), the other person is not going to access the same Table A
thru the same form or any other form?

Again...

NO.

It is NOT the case that one user opening a table will lock all other
users out of that table.

Access is *a multiuser database*, and - by default in the newer
versions - uses "single record" locking. If two users (from their own
frontends) attempt to edit the *exact same record* in TableA at the
same time, the second one to do so will get an error message; but if
they're entering data into new records, or editing different records,
they should have NO problem.

John W. Vinson[MVP]

 

[AccessHelp]

Thanks guys. I will try the way you guys said.

That statement is *simply incorrect*. Access is a multiuser database
environment, out of the box.

"Splitting" is a good idea - it means that you should have one
database file containing the Tables, on a shared drive; each user
should have their own copy of the "frontend" containing the forms,
reports, etc. with links to the tables in the backend.

Database Replication is complex and rather hard to manage, and is not
appropriate for this situation. It's needed when you have users who
are not sharing a network (say one user at the office and another
traveller using the database on a laptop); it lets you keep two
backends (containing, again, just the tables) synchronized. If all
your users have access to the shared backend over a reasonably fast,
stable LAN then replication is just a lot of extra work for no
benefit.

See http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/splitapp/index.htm for a thorough
overview of the database splitting issue.

John W. Vinson[MVP]