Number of users

[slickdock]

I am deploying an MDE Access 2002 application. The clients will pay a "per
seat" fee. How can I limit their number of users to the number of seats they
have purchased?

 

[Jack Leach]

Ideally you keep a table of active users for the db, setting and removing
records during login/logout procedures. So, during your login procedure, if
there's more than X number of records, let the user trying to log in know
about it and close the app.

hth
--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"I haven''t failed, I''ve found ten thousand ways that don''t work."
-Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

 

[slickdock]

Each user is allowed to simultaneously open multiple copies of the app on
their desktop. This allows them to multi-task. If I am understanding you
correctly, would this technique not work in this scenario? How else could I
accomplish it?

 

[Gina Whipp]

slickdock,

Actually, the question should be why are your Users opening more then once
instance of the same database? Why isn't the form set up to allow them to
multi-task?

Come to think of it... how are you counting your seats, per User or per open
instance? If it's per User Jack's suggestion will work. If it's per open
instance that creates a problem. Is this database split (FE's/BE)?

--
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

Each user is allowed to simultaneously open multiple copies of the app on
their desktop. This allows them to multi-task. If I am understanding you
correctly, would this technique not work in this scenario? How else could I
accomplish it?

 

[Jack Leach]

For my purposes, I restrict this possibility. The Computer name is stored in
the active user table, and if the comp name of the person trying to open the
app exists, they get a message saying they're already logged in, and are not
allowed to enter.

In this case, you may be able to include this computer name (see
mvps.org/access API section for the correct way to get the info) in the table
as well, and run a query that will return how many different computers
currently have a user logged in. That way, if you need to allow multiple
instances open from a computer, you can restrict how many computers are
allowed to access the project at once.

One point to make on that is computer name vs. win logon user... in my case,
every computer in our area will only have one win user, so I never bothered
to take this last step, but technically, rather than checking just the
computer name, you should be checking the comp name and the win user, to
prevent multiple users from logging in under different windows accounts from
the same computer.

Also, just a quick note... IMO, you would be better off designing the app so
the users can multitask right from one instance of the app instead having
them open multiple instances. This generally leads to confusion and having
to take a very hard look at the integrity of the app to make sure access
doesn't get confused within itself. Just a though...

hth
--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"I haven''t failed, I''ve found ten thousand ways that don''t work."
-Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

 

[Jack Leach]

Actually, the question should be why are your Users opening more then once

instance of the same database? Why isn't the form set up to allow them to
multi-task?

My sentiments exactly. I wasn't sure where I got the idea from, but I've
always felt that you're far better off if you only have one instance of
access open and running... I get very nervous when I run more than one.
Aside from that, developing with the usage of multiple instances of the same
app running leads to long workarounds and awkward code, such as we're seeing
here.

At one point a few months ago I was wondering about running two different
apps in access at the same time... our currently deployed copy that I use at
work for work, and opening the dev version at the same time. I posted the
question here and was given a few answers along the lines of "as long as you
are using currentdb and not DbEngine(0).(0) you should be fine..." Still not
a fan.

Personally I haven't run into any situation where the developer can't
provide a main switchboard and have everything working independantly off of
that switchboard, allowing them to multitask however they like.. they'll only
need one version of the switchboard open and can open whatever other forms
they like from there.

Another advantage to doing it like this: In some cases, you might not want
certain activities performed while certain other activities are pending.
Restricting the user the one instance of the app makes it expotentionally
easier to verify that some procedure can be run or form can be opened if you
might have a particular rule against it based on conditions in another form.
For instance, you might want to keep the user from generating an Invoice if
the PackingSlips have not yet been completed.

Anyway, yea... I would highly suggest avoiding multiple instances of the app.

Just my 2 cents


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"I haven''t failed, I''ve found ten thousand ways that don''t work."
-Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

 

[Gina Whipp]

Jack,

Hmmm, so tell us how you really feel? <grin>

--
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

Actually, the question should be why are your Users opening more then once
instance of the same database? Why isn't the form set up to allow them to
multi-task?

My sentiments exactly. I wasn't sure where I got the idea from, but I've
always felt that you're far better off if you only have one instance of
access open and running... I get very nervous when I run more than one.
Aside from that, developing with the usage of multiple instances of the same
app running leads to long workarounds and awkward code, such as we're seeing
here.

At one point a few months ago I was wondering about running two different
apps in access at the same time... our currently deployed copy that I use at
work for work, and opening the dev version at the same time. I posted the
question here and was given a few answers along the lines of "as long as you
are using currentdb and not DbEngine(0).(0) you should be fine..." Still
not
a fan.

Personally I haven't run into any situation where the developer can't
provide a main switchboard and have everything working independantly off of
that switchboard, allowing them to multitask however they like.. they'll
only
need one version of the switchboard open and can open whatever other forms
they like from there.

Another advantage to doing it like this: In some cases, you might not want
certain activities performed while certain other activities are pending.
Restricting the user the one instance of the app makes it expotentionally
easier to verify that some procedure can be run or form can be opened if you
might have a particular rule against it based on conditions in another form.
For instance, you might want to keep the user from generating an Invoice if
the PackingSlips have not yet been completed.

Anyway, yea... I would highly suggest avoiding multiple instances of the
app.

Just my 2 cents


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"I haven''t failed, I''ve found ten thousand ways that don''t work."
-Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

 

[Jack Leach]

*abashed*

I'm so sorry... I didn't mean for it to come off like that.

Actually I'm wondering if I'm right... was hoping to draw some discussion
out of it. This is one of those things that I got an idea of somewhere but
don't really have anything to back it up except to say "because that's the
way that I think it is."


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"I haven''t failed, I''ve found ten thousand ways that don''t work."
-Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

 

[Gina Whipp]

Jack,

I was and still am grinning! I was hoping the OP would respond with an
explanation but no luck so far. While there might be a valid reason to open
Access multiple times, and mind you, I can't think of one, it is not
something I would recommend. I too have no valid data to support not doing
so as I do but it is usually because I am working on more then one project
at a time. I flip back and forth between the *different* databases and have
never had an issue BUT I would *never* have my end Users doing this as it
just sounds like a recipe for corruption and save issues (and the OP is
talking about the same database). You could easily overwrite yourself by
having multiple instances of the same database open.

--
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

"Jack Leach" <dymondjack at hot mail dot com> wrote in message
*abashed*

I'm so sorry... I didn't mean for it to come off like that.

Actually I'm wondering if I'm right... was hoping to draw some discussion
out of it. This is one of those things that I got an idea of somewhere but
don't really have anything to back it up except to say "because that's the
way that I think it is."


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"I haven''t failed, I''ve found ten thousand ways that don''t work."
-Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

 

[Jack Leach]

was hoping to draw some discussion

I was and still am grinning! I was hoping the OP would respond with an
explanation but no luck so far. While there might be a valid reason to open
Access multiple times, and mind you, I can't think of one, it is not
something I would recommend. I too have no valid data to support not doing
so as I do but it is usually because I am working on more then one project
at a time. I flip back and forth between the *different* databases and have
never had an issue BUT I would *never* have my end Users doing this as it
just sounds like a recipe for corruption and save issues (and the OP is
talking about the same database). You could easily overwrite yourself by
having multiple instances of the same database open.

Well there we go... mission accomplished! And now I have some MVP backup
for next time the subject comes around (well that's what they said... who am
I to argue?) <g>

Often when I post and look back on it I think geez, I hope nobody takes the
offensively... it's just the way it comes out. I suppose it doesn't matter,
as long as somebody's gaining from it.


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind." --Theodor Seuss Geisel, aka Dr. Seuss

 

[Gina Whipp]

Jack,

Glad to help.... and,I have not seen one post by you that was offensive in
any way... so no worries there.

Happy Posting!
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

I was and still am grinning! I was hoping the OP would respond with an
explanation but no luck so far. While there might be a valid reason to
open
Access multiple times, and mind you, I can't think of one, it is not
something I would recommend. I too have no valid data to support not
doing
so as I do but it is usually because I am working on more then one project
at a time. I flip back and forth between the *different* databases and
have
never had an issue BUT I would *never* have my end Users doing this as it
just sounds like a recipe for corruption and save issues (and the OP is
talking about the same database). You could easily overwrite yourself by
having multiple instances of the same database open.

Well there we go... mission accomplished! And now I have some MVP backup
for next time the subject comes around (well that's what they said... who am
I to argue?) <g>

Often when I post and look back on it I think geez, I hope nobody takes the
offensively... it's just the way it comes out. I suppose it doesn't matter,
as long as somebody's gaining from it.


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind." --Theodor Seuss Geisel, aka Dr. Seuss