Advice on implementating transaction-based database across WAN

[BananaRepublic]

So I'm a bit stumped. Reading various threads, I'm basically not sure what
would be the best approach in my case.

The project requires that I be able to do transactional processing across
more than one records. I am not sure how this will work with Access, which
handles transaction pretty well within single record, but once you need to
treat several records insert and/or update as single transaction, I don't
know how this can be done without using unbound forms, and I have a feeling
that using unbound forms would basically defeat the point of using Access.

Also, I was planning on using indirect replication as this will be used
across WAN, but according to what I'm reading, it isn't recommended when I
want to use transactions.At this point, I'm feeling like I'm between a rock
and a hard place. The only reason I want to use Access is because I simply
want to develop the front end client and be done with it; I do not have time
& resources to invest in a proper .exe application, but need some more
controls over the bound forms, if that's possible.

Should I grin and bear the unbound forms where I really need multi-records
transactions and use bound forms for the rest (that doesn't really resolve
the problem of not being able to use indirect synchronization), or is there
an way I didn't think about before?

TIA.

 

[Guest]

"The project requires that I be able to do transactional processing across
more than one records"
-Why and to what purpose?

Can you not handle the sync requirements with referential integrity
constraints?

-Dorian

 

[BananaRepublic via AccessMonster.com]

-Why and to what purpose?

The database is a case management that will handle several contracts that has
their own rules. Furthermore, given the nature of contracts' terms, I want to
make it easy to modify the filing requirements, ideally meaning that the
database does all the work of ensuring so and so client's paperwork is all up
to date and compliant with this and that contract, and when it's not, gives
out a reminder to the users.

The idea was that I would have a table that would specify the rules for a
given contract then create another table that links the rules with a client
with a "answer" which will be validated against the "validation" field in the
rules table. Because some rules are interdependent, this is where I want to
have transaction across more than one record, so there is no corruption or
integrity problems should the user somehow leave the record unintentionally
or the database was not able to complete processing for whatever reasons.

Can you not handle the sync requirements with referential integrity
constraints?

Pretty sure I could. I always had intended to. Or am I missing something?
This is strictly about enforcing business rules (or so I hope.)

-Dorian

Thanks!

 

[Jeff Boyce]

I'm not entirely sure I understand where you're seeing a potential issue.

If you would describe the tables you are considering, this newsgroup
(tablesdbdesign) may be able to offer suggestions.


--
Regards

Jeff Boyce
www.InformationFutures.net

Microsoft Office/Access MVP


Microsoft IT Academy Program Mentor
http://microsoftitacademy.com/