Access 2000 - Chronic Corruptions

[Guest]

I've used Access 97 extensively, and now am building applications in 2000. I
have 10 users accessing a database, and it repeatedly is corrupting itself.
Some demos of my database are as follows:

1.) Using DAO recordset objects and connections
2.) All data is local to current database
3.) I use an LDB viewer to view who is on the database

When I use the LDB viewer, I can watch users log out of the database. When
they logged out of the database in 97, the tool showed their access as NO and
Suspect as NO. However in my new 2000 database, every user when they log out
is receiving a SUSPECT = YES.

I know that there are significant changes between 97 and 2000, but for the
life of me, I can't figure out why I would be having these issues. I've
recently changed my code from DAO to ADO, and am not using the LDB viewer.
Does anyone have any thoughts or experiences similar to this?

 

[Tim Ferguson]

I have 10 users accessing a database, and it repeatedly is
corrupting itself.

2.) All data is local to current database

I think these two comments identify the problem. At this level of
concurrency, you really need to be splitting the database into front ends
and back end, and giving each user its own copy of the front end.

I've recently changed my code from DAO to ADO

Why??!!


Tim F

 

[Guest]

Tim, thank you for the follow up. I'm gummed up on the front end/back end
process. I shouldn't feel any pain moving from a 97 version to a 2000 from a
stability standpoint. I used to have 15-20 people updating a database in 97,
with limited fallout using local data.

About moving from DAO to ADO, I was out of options, my understanding was
that 2000 utilizes ADO as its preferred connectivity scheme. It was a
process of elimination.

 

[David C. Holley]

No, it is not neccessary to migrate from DAO to ADO. Access has at its
heart the JET ENGINE to which (in which?) DAO is native. ADO was created
as a generic means to connect to *ANY* database independent of platform,
DB software, etc. When it was released, MS touted it as the latest and
greatest thing and as the successor to DAO. MS has basically abandonded it.

 

[Tim Ferguson]

Tim, thank you for the follow up. I'm gummed up on the front end/back
end process. I shouldn't feel any pain moving from a 97 version to a
2000 from a stability standpoint. I used to have 15-20 people
updating a database in 97, with limited fallout using local data.

In that case you were really lucky. I doubt that anyone round here would
recommend that approach with any version of Access. Hope you have really
good backups!

About moving from DAO to ADO, I was out of options, my understanding
was that 2000 utilizes ADO as its preferred connectivity scheme. It
was a process of elimination.

ADO was intended to be a small, generalised library for connecting to a
wide variety of data sources, including SQL Server, oracle, jet, excel
etc etc; particularly within the context of web servers, client scripts
and so on. MS at one time foresaw everyone moving over to MSDE and
leaving Jet. GAK what they plan for us now!

DAO is still faster, more functional and the best choice for talking to
Jet databases. There are some abilities that never got updated, mainly in
the DDL, but for practically all purposes it's the library of choice for
most Access work.

I probably should not have sounded quite so snitty (!) but it was well-
meant.

All the best


Tim F

 

[David C. Holley]

Although, I wouldn't recommend against migrating from DAO to ADO, just
for the sake of it nor would I call it a waste of time - at least your
familar with it.