Connecting two back end Databases

[Thorson]

I currently have a database that is being used by a handful of users. The
database Back End is located on the Network while the front end is on the
users' individual computers. The problem is that a couple of the users are
connected to the Network through a VPN, which results in the database running
very slowly. Is there anyway to put a copy of the front end and back end on
the user's computer and then when they click a button or automatically at a
certain time of day the Back end on their computer will sync with the back
end on the network by adding any new files the other back end has to each
one? I don't know if this is possible or how complicated it would be, but we
need to speed up the process somehow.

Thanks,

 

[Thorson]

I haven't heard of either of those, I am new to this. I will look into both
those options. If you also know of any good sites about replication that
would be great. Thank you so much!

 

[Thorson]

After reading the link you put in we are already set up on a Terminal Server,
the problem is that one user's connection to the nextwork/server is really
slow (due to internet speeds etc.) and there is no way for him to get a
faster connection. Also the database is already split.

 

[Jack Leach]

Replication is a rather advanced subject, AFIAK. Search some boards for an
MVP named David Fenton... this subject seems to be his specialty and I've
read enough posts from him to believe that he may know more about replication
than anyone else. His website links to a Jet Replication Wiki with all sorts
of information regarding the subject. In any case, using replication
properly seems to be a very intricate task.

http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page


--
Jack Leach
www.tristatemachine.com

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

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

After reading the link you put in we are already set up on a Terminal Server,
the problem is that one user's connection to the nextwork/server is really
slow (due to internet speeds etc.) and there is no way for him to get a
faster connection.

I've used Terminal Server via 28.8 dialup at motels and such. While
it was sluggish it did work. And TS is optimized for slow speeds.
Hmm, maybe there are some TS client settings that are set for high
speed access rather than slow speed access. Check the Experiences
tab on the RDP software settings and ensure they've got the
appropriate speed checked off.

Where is his copy of the front end located? On his local PC or via
the network somewhere?

Tony

 

[Thorson]

I recently switched to ACCESS 2007 earlier this year. I was talking with a
co-worker about the possibility of Jet Replication and he suggested instead
to go internet based. I know in ACCESS 2003 the Administrator/designer could
create DAP, which from my understanding are web-based. I have never worked
with DAP, I only had a brief training on them. Is this web-based or a
similar thing available in ACCESS 2007? How well does it work?

Thanks

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I recently switched to ACCESS 2007 earlier this year. I was talking with a
co-worker about the possibility of Jet Replication and he suggested instead
to go internet based. I know in ACCESS 2003 the Administrator/designer could
create DAP, which from my understanding are web-based. I have never worked
with DAP, I only had a brief training on them. Is this web-based or a
similar thing available in ACCESS 2007? How well does it work?

DAPs have long been deprecated. I'd suggest looking for alternatives.

Now can you get your coworker to be a bit more specific about getting
Internet based? There are all kinds of methods out there but very
few involve using Access and will take lots of time and money.

Tony

 

[Thorson]

My coworker suggested DAP to possibly speed up record entry into the
database, however my coworker knows even less about ACCESS than I do, and as
we now know DAP is no longer available in Access 2007l.

We don't want to spend a lot of time or money. I think Replication is
probably the best solution for us. I am researching and reading up on
replication, but as someone said it appears to be a complicated process. We
may decide to hire someone to help us out or design that part.

 

[RD]

<shudder>
I am in the unfortunate position of supporting a bunch (about a dozen)
of Access97 databases created by the infamous "Bad Contractor".

She built all of her applications as unsplit and just put shortcuts on
all the user's workstation desktops. Over time I've been able to
split the ones with the heaviest user load into FE/BE.

I have a couple of ... "problem children" who never respond when I
announce a new version of the front end, so I can put it on their
computers, and insist on using the front end located on the network.
Because of the environment around here, I am unable to change this.
So, predictably (almost like clockwork), I have to repair corrupted
Access applications. In fact, I had to do it just yesterday. One of
the users *willfully* (though maybe not maliciously) bypassed my
hand-rolled security. Heh ... then proceeded to delete my security
measures and fuxored the application.

I love Access. It's my "go-to" tool for much of what I do but, if
it's not set up properly (check this out:
http://www.mvps.org/access/tencommandments.htm)
you WILL regret it.

My tuppence 'orth,
RD

Why is this a bad idea? Just curious. Guess I'm showing my ignorance of how
Access works - sorry for the bad advice! It seems that any app running on a
server can potentially have many users.

Bad idea Jim.

It is NEVER a good idea to have multiple users using the same front end! Now,
if you mean give each user a copy of the front end on the server, and use
Terminal Server, then I'm in agreement.

Dale

Is there a reason why each user needs a separate copy of the front end? It
sounds like they're all using the same back end. If your back end is already

[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]

Thanks,

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Another option might be to use SharePoint lists, if you have access to MOSS
2007.

Now there's an idea if your data isn't overly complex and doesn't
require relational integrity.

I think Albert Kallal has stated that you can use Microsoft Office
Live sharepoint site for free. But I sure could be mistaken.

Tony

 

[Dale Fye]

This is the hyperlink I tried to pass:

http://www.usenet.com/newsgroups/comp.databases.ms-access/msg13042.html

you can expand the search to include "Albert" and "Kallal". Albert has
responded to numerous questions on news groups regarding shared front ends.

----
HTH
Dale

Your link didn't show up. I did that search and found many threads, read thru
several. Only one looked like it was related to a corruption problem, and
that was related to an MDW file. I have been running this way for about three
years with several customers. Each customer has their own directory with the
FE and BE in it. Each one has anywhere from 1 to 5 or 6 users logged in every
day, typically using the same small subset of forms and reports. Haven't had
any problems, but I guess maybe I've just been lucky to this point. Guess
I'll have to consider changing the way I'm doing this.

The problem is with corruption of the application. When multiple users are
accessing the same front end, it is far more likely to get corrupted. Here
is a link to a question which will provide a bit more info. If that doesn't
do it, try searching for "shared front end"

Dale

Why is this a bad idea? Just curious. Guess I'm showing my ignorance of how
Access works - sorry for the bad advice! It seems that any app running on a

[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]

Thanks,

 

[Dale Fye]

did you try limiting the earlier search by including "Kallal" in the search
string?

It may have something to do with AccessMonster. My original post was via
that interface as well, and the hyperlink didn't show up in that either.
When I posted from the microsoft.com/office/community/... it seemed to post
OK.

Can you see the hyperlink if you go to:

http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...n-us&mid=d73c480b-5cce-42f8-8f1f-d90aa0d09aff

----
HTH
Dale

For some reason that link is not appearing for me. I just see a blank line.
Maybe another vista bug? (Just went to a new laptop with vista recently -
don't get me started!

This is the hyperlink I tried to pass:

you can expand the search to include "Albert" and "Kallal". Albert has
responded to numerous questions on news groups regarding shared front ends.

----
HTH
Dale

Your link didn't show up. I did that search and found many threads, read thru
several. Only one looked like it was related to a corruption problem, and

[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]

Thanks,

 

[Dale Fye]

Jim,

It was one of the first things I was advised when I started developing
multi-user databases, so I have actually never encountered the problem.

I think this thread has gotten too long to interest the experts on that.

I'd create a new thread "Shared front-end corruption" (or something like
that) and repost your question to that. I would expect responses from
Kallal, Toews, Steele, Browne, and maybe some of the other MVPs to a subject
like that.

----
HTH
Dale

Yes, I was able to see it via that link - odd. I switched over to Access
Monster a while back because the Microsoft Forum route was horribly
unreliable for me - locking up all the time or extremely slow.

However, that page doesn't really give any details on the specifics of the
corruption problems that you can have when sharing FEs, basically just says
'don't do it', along with some things about bandwidth. Bandwidth is no
concern at all, from what I can tell - since they're running on a terminal
server, at least as I understand it, there is no application data
transmission over the network. Everything is done on the server, other than
the data presentation. Like I said, we've never had any problems at all,
performance-related or otherwise, other than the standard ones you get when
running any app via the internet. Not saying I don't believe there are
potential corruption problems, mind you, just that that particlular link
doesn't really get into that in any detail at all. I'll search around a
little more. Just curious to see what can happen, if there are specific
things that can cause corruption, etc.

Do you know of any specifc examples of what this corruption does to the appl,
how it manifests itself, etc.? Can it end up corrupting the data? Obviously
the data would be the biggest concern by far. I install new versions fairly
frequently (typically a minimum of once a week). I also take frequent BE
backups as well.

did you try limiting the earlier search by including "Kallal" in the search
string?

It may have something to do with AccessMonster. My original post was via
that interface as well, and the hyperlink didn't show up in that either.
When I posted from the microsoft.com/office/community/... it seemed to post
OK.

Can you see the hyperlink if you go to:

http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...n-us&mid=d73c480b-5cce-42f8-8f1f-d90aa0d09aff

----
HTH
Dale

For some reason that link is not appearing for me. I just see a blank line.
Maybe another vista bug? (Just went to a new laptop with vista recently -

[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]

Thanks,

 

[Thorson]

My understanding was that Dale was correct in his statement that each users
should have their own copy of the Front End. We have not come up with a
solution yet, but I think that Jet Replication is the best idea, since I am
new to access and it appears to be fairly complicated we may wait a while or
hire someone with more experience for this particular task.

Thanks for your help!
--
Thorson

Bad idea Jim.

It is NEVER a good idea to have multiple users using the same front end! Now,
if you mean give each user a copy of the front end on the server, and use
Terminal Server, then I'm in agreement.

Dale

Is there a reason why each user needs a separate copy of the front end? It
sounds like they're all using the same back end. If your back end is already
on a terminal server, it seems like you could just put the front end on the
server and have them log on to the server and run the appl there. It seems to
me that your main performance problem results from havng to send data over
the network. By running on the server this wouldn't be a problem. This might
require some work for setting up IDs and permissions on the server, etc., but
other than that it seems like it would be the best way to go. Maybe there's
an issue with your appl that I'm not aware of. We use terminal server and we
have the users log on to the server and run the appl there. It makes for very
easy distibution of new versions and there are no performance problems,
though our users have fairly fast connections.

I currently have a database that is being used by a handful of users. The
database Back End is located on the Network while the front end is on the

[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]

Thanks,

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I have a couple of ... "problem children"

Ahh, such a polite term. Reminds me of the idiot I encountered today
who, while driving faster than most people on the highway insisted on
staying in the left hand lane for at least 100 kms. I was behind him
all the way as the chrome on his tail flaps was blinking at me.

who never respond when I
announce a new version of the front end, so I can put it on their
computers, and insist on using the front end located on the network.

I specifically created the Auto FE Updater utility so that I could
make changes to the FE MDE as often as I wanted and be quite confident
that the next time someone went to run the app that it would pull in
the latest version. For more info on the errors or the Auto FE
Updater utility see the free Auto FE Updater utility at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/autofe.htm at my website to keep the
FE on each PC up to date.

Tony