After overwriting, FE will not function properly until 2nd re-open

[JenPavey]

Dude - you are all over this forum. Do you even have a job?

I'm the #1 fan of MS Access. You constantly try to put words in my
mouth.
But Access is _NOT_ a database.. you are not using it in the
reccomended manner.

I'll be damned if I let you kids drown with MDB / AccDB.

You guys are just uneducated.. I mean-- any chipmunk with a brain
would get tired of dealing with this tedium.

Linked Table this-- Linked table that-- failure to export this--
corrupt record that.

Security in 12 different places.

You're not dealing with a 'simple db'
you're using a spreadsheet with a different label on it.

Do you even enforce referential integrity? lol

You don't need to make the users 'grab a new copy'-- With ADP you can
run it over the network. With ADP you can close the file on the
server-- without risking 'losing data'.

With ADP you can edit a query-- without pushing out a new version.
With ADP you can edit tables / queries-- without kicking users out of
the database.

With ADP you don't subject your users to a 30 second launch time.
You don't subject your users to downtime.

With ADP you don't have to ask your network admin to bounce the file
server-- because susie didn't close her database on Friday afternoon.

With ADP; you don't need to buy terminal licenses.

With ADP you can replicate to a desktop / laptop.
With ADP you can use _WIRELESS_.

With ADP you can use _VPN_.

Can you use VPN with Access MDB? ROFLMAO

What about when your manager is in Texas and wants to look something
up in the database?
Do they call you and ask for a report?

Better to give them dynamic adhoc tools-- and let them get their own
data out of the trough.

I just don't think that Access solutions are 'good enough'.

It just makes me sick to think-- that you actually get _PAID_ for
being too _FAT_AND_LAZY_ to right-size your data platform.

-Aaron

Aaron - after my updates - the users simply grab a new FE copy - no
re-linking necessary. Sure - I could programmatically have the "grab a new
FE copy" done automatically once users open their FE's, but haven't found it
necessary to do that at this point.

I don't really care about another better method or program to run the simple
database we need. Since this is an MS Access forum - why are you floating
around boasting about its downfalls? Were you just having a bad day and
needed to pound on someone for no good reason?

this doesn't suggest anything.

I reccomend that you guys find a better way to do things.

When you change servers; what do you have to do-- run around updating
linked table names? lol?

I don't-- I use Cnames (DNS Alias records) with my SQL Server
applications and I don't have to do a single thing when databases
move; new servers come up; etc.

I don't make network admins bounce their file servers.. Do you?

-Aaron

You wrote: "Linked tables are neither reccomended [sic] or optimal"

This suggests a published recommendation somewhere, or at least an informed
discussion to which you can refer. If you had said "I don't recommend
linked tables because ..." at least you would have a basis for your
argument, but as it is you seem to be suggesting that unnamed sources
support your position.

<[email protected]> wrote in message

I don't need reliable documentation.

I will demonstrate a faster, easier solution-- that takes less time to
develop.

Is that acceptable to 'his bruceness'?

There's nothing wrong with my tedious song.

You're the dude that's stuck in '1st grade of the database world'.

On Mar 24, 12:32 pm, "BruceM" <[email protected]> wrote:

You are incorrect. However, if you wish to make a case, provide some
reliable documentation, which is to say something than another refrain of
your tedious song.

since the year 2000-- Linked tables are neither reccomended or
optimal.
Move to ADP or Php / mySQL - Microsoft has proven time and time again
that they don't give a hoot about 'developers, developers,
developers'.

On Mar 24, 7:41 am, "Douglas J. Steele"

Do you have code in your front-end to ensure that the front-end is
correctly
linked to the back-end? Is it possible that that code hasn't yet run
when
you run into the problem you're describing?

I noticed this problem months ago, but didn't really think much of it
until
now: I developed a FE/BE database in Access 2003. Users overwrite
their
FE
as I complete design upgrades. This has worked well for us... Although
on a
few computers, of which I've determined have Access 2000 9.0.2720,
whenever
they overwrite their FE, on the first time of opening, it does not
want
to
work properly until you close the database and open it a second time..

In more detail: I have an autoexec macro opening a form where the user
selects their name from a drop down. Then they hit "OK"... On Click
VBA
code
runs to open up another form (Main Menu) and then hide the user name
form.
On the Access 2000 machines, once the FE has been overwritten, the
user
can
select their name from the drop down but the "OK" does not work. We
close
the database at this point and re-open and everything then works
fine...?
Here's the OK button code if this has anything to do with the problem:

Private Sub Command5_Click()
DoCmd.OpenForm "Search Form"
Me.Visible = False
End Sub

I usually can find all the answers I want in this forum - it's just
been
a
matter of asking my question correctly, but I can't seem to find
anything
related to this issue... hence - here's my first post.

Any and all help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

JP- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Signed,
JP - Recently Appointed Leader of the "Databases for Little People" Club

<chuckle>

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

 

[BruceM]

No point in arguing. He doesn't know that Access is a relational database
management system if he thinks a properly constructed mdb is the same as a
spreadsheet. He knows nothing about user-level security if he thinks it
needs to be in 12 places. He seems to be mystified by referential integrity
enforcement in Access. He is unaware that users can be kicked out of the
database if need be. I don't know what "little susie" will do in his world
when he closes the file on the server. I guess everything just keeps
working whether or not the data and interface are available to the users.
I will continue to point out to people who post here and receive the first
response from Aaron that there is little to be gained by listening to him,
but as for arguing any more with such a pathetic creature, enough is enough
for me.

Dude - you are all over this forum. Do you even have a job?

I'm the #1 fan of MS Access. You constantly try to put words in my
mouth.
But Access is _NOT_ a database.. you are not using it in the
reccomended manner.

I'll be damned if I let you kids drown with MDB / AccDB.

You guys are just uneducated.. I mean-- any chipmunk with a brain
would get tired of dealing with this tedium.

Linked Table this-- Linked table that-- failure to export this--
corrupt record that.

Security in 12 different places.

You're not dealing with a 'simple db'
you're using a spreadsheet with a different label on it.

Do you even enforce referential integrity? lol

You don't need to make the users 'grab a new copy'-- With ADP you can
run it over the network. With ADP you can close the file on the
server-- without risking 'losing data'.

With ADP you can edit a query-- without pushing out a new version.
With ADP you can edit tables / queries-- without kicking users out of
the database.

With ADP you don't subject your users to a 30 second launch time.
You don't subject your users to downtime.

With ADP you don't have to ask your network admin to bounce the file
server-- because susie didn't close her database on Friday afternoon.

With ADP; you don't need to buy terminal licenses.

With ADP you can replicate to a desktop / laptop.
With ADP you can use _WIRELESS_.

With ADP you can use _VPN_.

Can you use VPN with Access MDB? ROFLMAO

What about when your manager is in Texas and wants to look something
up in the database?
Do they call you and ask for a report?

Better to give them dynamic adhoc tools-- and let them get their own
data out of the trough.

I just don't think that Access solutions are 'good enough'.

It just makes me sick to think-- that you actually get _PAID_ for
being too _FAT_AND_LAZY_ to right-size your data platform.

-Aaron

Aaron - after my updates - the users simply grab a new FE copy - no
re-linking necessary. Sure - I could programmatically have the "grab a
new
FE copy" done automatically once users open their FE's, but haven't
found it
necessary to do that at this point.

I don't really care about another better method or program to run the
simple
database we need. Since this is an MS Access forum - why are you
floating
around boasting about its downfalls? Were you just having a bad day
and
needed to pound on someone for no good reason?



:
this doesn't suggest anything.

I reccomend that you guys find a better way to do things.

When you change servers; what do you have to do-- run around updating
linked table names? lol?

I don't-- I use Cnames (DNS Alias records) with my SQL Server
applications and I don't have to do a single thing when databases
move; new servers come up; etc.

I don't make network admins bounce their file servers.. Do you?

-Aaron

You wrote: "Linked tables are neither reccomended [sic] or
optimal"

This suggests a published recommendation somewhere, or at least an
informed
discussion to which you can refer. If you had said "I don't
recommend
linked tables because ..." at least you would have a basis for your
argument, but as it is you seem to be suggesting that unnamed
sources
support your position.


I don't need reliable documentation.

I will demonstrate a faster, easier solution-- that takes less time
to
develop.

Is that acceptable to 'his bruceness'?

There's nothing wrong with my tedious song.

You're the dude that's stuck in '1st grade of the database world'.

-Aaron


You are incorrect. However, if you wish to make a case, provide
some
reliable documentation, which is to say something than another
refrain of
your tedious song.


Correction--

since the year 2000-- Linked tables are neither reccomended or
optimal.
Move to ADP or Php / mySQL - Microsoft has proven time and time
again
that they don't give a hoot about 'developers, developers,
developers'.

-Aaron

On Mar 24, 7:41 am, "Douglas J. Steele"

Do you have code in your front-end to ensure that the front-end
is
correctly
linked to the back-end? Is it possible that that code hasn't
yet run
when
you run into the problem you're describing?

--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVPhttp://I.Am/DougSteele
(no e-mails, please!)

message


I noticed this problem months ago, but didn't really think
much of it
until
now: I developed a FE/BE database in Access 2003. Users
overwrite
their
FE
as I complete design upgrades. This has worked well for us...
Although
on a
few computers, of which I've determined have Access 2000
9.0.2720,
whenever
they overwrite their FE, on the first time of opening, it
does not
want
to
work properly until you close the database and open it a
second time..

In more detail: I have an autoexec macro opening a form where
the user
selects their name from a drop down. Then they hit "OK"... On
Click
VBA
code
runs to open up another form (Main Menu) and then hide the
user name
form.
On the Access 2000 machines, once the FE has been
overwritten, the
user
can
select their name from the drop down but the "OK" does not
work. We
close
the database at this point and re-open and everything then
works
fine...?
Here's the OK button code if this has anything to do with the
problem:

Private Sub Command5_Click()
DoCmd.OpenForm "Search Form"
Me.Visible = False
End Sub

I usually can find all the answers I want in this forum -
it's just
been
a
matter of asking my question correctly, but I can't seem to
find
anything
related to this issue... hence - here's my first post.

Any and all help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

JP- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 

[BruceM]

I'm in.

Welp - Maybe you should run for President, then try to rid the country of
MS
Access.

As far as me, my original concern here has nothing at all to do with India
or anything overseas or really anything else you've been ranting about, so
I'll happily continue to play with all my unstable midget databases.

Signed,
JP - Recently Appointed Leader of the "Databases for Little People" Club

 

[aaron.kempf]

I do know that it is a piece of crap DBMS.

I do know that it kinda enforces RI.. until you need to split it into
multiple mdbs.

I just don't appreciate these limitations.

What would happen-- if someone said 'but we don't _NEED_ to move
West-- we can just keep these 13 colonies'.

It's your own Manifest Destiny.
Move to SQL Server, kids

-Aaron

No point in arguing.  He doesn't know that Access is a relational database
management system if he thinks a properly constructed mdb is the same as a
spreadsheet.  He knows nothing about user-level security if he thinks it
needs to be in 12 places.  He seems to be mystified by referential integrity
enforcement in Access.  He is unaware that users can be kicked out of the
database if need be.  I don't know what "little susie" will do in his world
when he closes the file on the server.  I guess everything just keeps
working whether or not the data and interface are available to the users.
I will continue to point out to people who post here and receive the first
response from Aaron that there is little to be gained by listening to him,
but as for arguing any more with such a pathetic creature, enough is enough
for me.

Dude - you are all over this forum.  Do you even have a job?

I'm the #1 fan of MS Access.  You constantly try to put words in my
mouth.
But Access is _NOT_ a database.. you are not using it in the
reccomended manner.
I'll be damned if I let you kids drown with MDB / AccDB.
You guys are just uneducated.. I mean-- any chipmunk with a brain
would get tired of dealing with this tedium.
Linked Table this-- Linked table that-- failure to export this--
corrupt record that.
Security in 12 different places.
You're not dealing with a 'simple db'
you're using a spreadsheet with a different label on it.
Do you even enforce referential integrity? lol
You don't need to make the users 'grab a new copy'-- With ADP you can
run it over the network.  With ADP you can close the file on the
server-- without risking 'losing data'.
With ADP you can edit a query-- without pushing out a new version.
With ADP you can edit tables / queries-- without kicking users out of
the database.
With ADP you don't subject your users to a 30 second launch time.
You don't subject your users to downtime.
With ADP you don't have to ask your network admin to bounce the file
server-- because susie didn't close her database on Friday afternoon.
With ADP; you don't need to buy terminal licenses.
With ADP you can replicate to a desktop / laptop.
With ADP you can use _WIRELESS_.
With ADP you can use _VPN_.
Can you use VPN with Access MDB? ROFLMAO
What about when your manager is in Texas and wants to look something
up in the database?
Do they call you and ask for a report?
Better to give them dynamic adhoc tools-- and let them get their own
data out of the trough.
I just don't think that Access solutions are 'good enough'.
It just makes me sick to think-- that you actually get _PAID_ for
being too _FAT_AND_LAZY_ to right-size your data platform.
-Aaron
On Mar 25, 10:01 am, JenPavey <[email protected]>
wrote:
Aaron - after my updates - the users simply grab a new FE copy - no
re-linking necessary.  Sure - I could programmatically have the "grab a
new
FE copy" done automatically once users open their FE's, but haven't
found it
necessary to do that at this point.
I don't really care about another better method or program to run the
simple
database we need.  Since this is an MS Access forum - why are you
floating
around boasting about its downfalls?  Were you just having a bad day
and
needed to pound on someone for no good reason?
:
this doesn't suggest anything.
I reccomend that you guys find a better way to do things.
When you change servers; what do you have to do-- run around updating
linked table names? lol?
I don't-- I use Cnames (DNS Alias records) with my SQL Server
applications and I don't have to do a single thing when databases
move; new servers come up; etc.
I don't make network admins bounce their file servers.. Do you?
-Aaron
You wrote:  "Linked tables are neither reccomended [sic] or
optimal"
This suggests a published recommendation somewhere, or at least an
informed
discussion to which you can refer.  If you had said "I don't
recommend
linked tables because ..." at least you would have a basis for your
argument, but as it is you seem to be suggesting that unnamed
sources
support your position.
I don't need reliable documentation.
I will demonstrate a faster, easier solution-- that takes less time
to
develop.
Is that acceptable to 'his bruceness'?
There's nothing wrong with my tedious song.
You're the dude that's stuck in '1st grade of the database world'..
-Aaron
You are incorrect. However, if you wish to make a case, provide
some
reliable documentation, which is to say something than another
refrain of
your tedious song.
Correction--
since the year 2000-- Linked tables are neither reccomended or
optimal.
Move to ADP or Php / mySQL - Microsoft has proven time and time
again
that they don't give a hoot about 'developers, developers,
developers'.
-Aaron
On Mar 24, 7:41 am, "Douglas J. Steele"
Do you have code in your front-end to ensure that the front-end
is
correctly
linked to the back-end? Is it possible that that code hasn't
yet run
when
you run into the problem you're describing?
--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVPhttp://I.Am/DougSteele
(no e-mails, please!)
message

I noticed this problem months ago, but didn't really think
much of it
until
now: I developed a FE/BE database in Access 2003. Users
overwrite
their
FE
as I complete design upgrades. This has worked well for us....
Although
on a
few computers, of which I've determined have Access 2000
9.0.2720,
whenever
they overwrite their FE, on the first time of opening, it
does not
want
to
work properly until you close the database and open it a
second time..
In more detail: I have an autoexec macro opening a form where
the user
selects their name from a drop down. Then they hit "OK"... On
Click
VBA
code
runs to open up another form (Main Menu) and then hide the
user name
form.
On the Access 2000 machines, once the FE has been
overwritten, the
user
can
select their name from the drop down but the "OK" does not
work. We
close
the database at this point and re-open and everything then
works
fine...?
Here's the OK button code if this has anything to do with the
problem:
Private Sub Command5_Click()
DoCmd.OpenForm "Search Form"
Me.Visible = False
End Sub
I usually can find all the answers I want in this forum -
it's just
been
a
matter of asking my question correctly, but I can't seem to
find
anything
related to this issue... hence - here's my first post.
Any and all help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks
JP- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 

[FWinters]

someone is angry uh?

Jobs are going to India because of people who use Access? You're
overreaching a bit there.

Jen

I disagree.

Have you ever heard of 'identity theft'?

What happens-- in the current version of MS Access that has _ZERO_
security.

Right?

I don't believe that SQL is _ONE_ percent more difficult to use.
You guys are just stuck in a rut; and not willing to 'expand your
horizons'.

The laziness of people like you are why all the jobs are going to
India.

In India-- Microsoft shows up with $10 billion and they say
'Everything is done in SQL Server'.

So why is it-- that there are more qualified SQL Server people in
India than in America?

BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE TONY-- WHO CLAIM THAT SQL SERVER IS 'TOO
DIFFICULT'.

SQL SERVER IS _ZERO_ PERCENT MORE DIFFICULT THAN MDB.

Sorry-- I just think that your laziness is a tribute to the decline of
the American Empire.

People like you-- that are ok with 'almost good enough' -- when you
can have TEN TIMES BETTER FOR THE SAME PRICE.

You don't need linked tables.

YOU DO NEED SQL AGENT.

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

I'm not angry.

I'm _CORRECT_ and I'm trying to liberate you kids from this hell of
'linked table manager' gag

-Aaron

Jobs are going to India because of people who use Access?  You're
overreaching a bit there.

Jen

I disagree.

Have you ever heard of 'identity theft'?

What happens-- in the current version of MS Access that has _ZERO_
security.

I don't believe that SQL is _ONE_ percent more difficult to use.
You guys are just stuck in a rut; and not willing to 'expand your
horizons'.

The laziness of people like you are why all the jobs are going to
India.

In India-- Microsoft shows up with $10 billion and they say
'Everything is done in SQL Server'.

So why is it-- that there are more qualified SQL Server people in
India than in America?

BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE TONY-- WHO CLAIM THAT SQL SERVER IS 'TOO
DIFFICULT'.

SQL SERVER IS _ZERO_ PERCENT MORE DIFFICULT THAN MDB.

Sorry-- I just think that your laziness is a tribute to the decline of
the American Empire.

People like you-- that are ok with 'almost good enough' --  when you
can have TEN TIMES BETTER FOR THE SAME PRICE.

 

[Bob Quintal]

m:

I'm not angry.

Ok so what are you -- a religious fanatic, insane, an a$$, or just
stupid?

I'm _CORRECT_ and I'm trying to liberate you kids from this hell
of 'linked table manager' gag

Please liberate yourself from the newsgroup. your Super Helpful
Information Tidbits are dangerous.

What can't you understand about GO AWAY!

 

[aaron.kempf]

None of them above.
I'm right-- even if everyone else here is dumb

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[JenPavey]

This is fun!!

I'm in.