Automatic Synchronization

[fcabre]

How can I implement an automatic synchronization on a replica database with
little or no user intervention? Can I tell it to Synchroize on close? Can I
create a macro to do this without putting the DB in a loop?

 

[David W. Fenton]

How can I implement an automatic synchronization on a replica
database with little or no user intervention? Can I tell it to
Synchroize on close? Can I create a macro to do this without
putting the DB in a loop?

If you have properly set up your replicated application, you will
have an unreplicated front end (forms/reports/etc.) linked to a
replicated back end with only your data tables.

The goal then is to have the back end synch with another replica
when the front end is closed.

First off, you have to consider a few issues:

1. do you have more than one user at a time? If so, you probably
don't want every user synching the shared back end each time they
close the front end.

2. if it's a single-user app (or only one user in each location
where you're wanting to synch), you have to consider what kind of
connection you have between the local replica and the remote replica
you want to synch with. If all the replicas are on the same LAN, I
have to question why you're using replication at all, since it
really serves no purpose there, as you should just share a single
back end. If, on the other hand, your remote replica is somewhere
across the Internet, a VPN or a WAN, then you can't use standard
direct replication, since it's way too dangerous (it's simply too
easy for the connection to drop during the synch and corrupt the
remote replica such that it is no longer replicable, i.e., can't be
synched with members of its replica set any more) and way too slow.
You need indirect (my preference) or Internet replication, both of
which are much more efficient and completely safe. But they also
require additional components and substantial expertise to set up
and use.

3. what you're asking can't be done with a macro -- it requires VBA
code.

Post back with some more information so we can provide better
answers. You also might want to read through some of the Jet
Replication Wiki:

http://dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/

 

[fcabre]

Okay, I have not implemented the replication scheme the way you indicated, I
was not aware of this implementation plan, ignorance is not bliss…

I have Access 2003, but will be required to update in the very near future.
I have an Access DB on a remote server, SQL is not an option. It basically
holds demographic and other information, with about 5 personnel inputting
data. They are located in different offices and use different computers in
the building. I have created replicas for each of them, because they require
the write capability. I have also created 10 Partial Replicas that only have
Read-only access.

You stated “If all the replicas are on the same LAN, I have to question why
you're using replication at all, since it really serves no purpose there, as
you should just share a single back end.â€

Well the problem is the network, our server, file and otherwise are not
located in our facility, they are located very far away and the connection is
very slow, yet another problem, that’s why I am using replication. It was
suggested to me by management. I am also not allowed to share a DB from a
local machine, this is prohibited in our current configuration. The current
Replication scheme has been working, but I am working with a lot of
constraints. I thought about using indirect but it didn’t seem to make sense
at the time.

I am backing up the most recent copy of the Database every few days and all
of the data into a separate location, but need to automate this process in a
way that is somewhat transparent to the user.

I couldn’t get the macro to work, you are correct, and programming is an
option, but I am limited to the constraints above.

Thanks, Frank...

 

[David W. Fenton]

I have Access 2003, but will be required to update in the very
near future. I have an Access DB on a remote server, SQL is not an
option. It basically holds demographic and other information, with
about 5 personnel inputting data. They are located in different
offices and use different computers in the building. I have
created replicas for each of them, because they require the write
capability. I have also created 10 Partial Replicas that only have
Read-only access.

I don't understand why anyone needs partial replicas, but many
people seem to think they are a good idea. I would restrict access
in the application, since partial replication really has zilch to do
with read/write access.

You stated ƒ oIf all the replicas are on the same LAN, I have to
question why you're using replication at all, since it really
serves no purpose there, as you should just share a single back
end.ƒ

Well the problem is the network, our server, file and otherwise
are not located in our facility, they are located very far away
and the connection is very slow,

....indicating that they are *not* on the same LAN...

yet another problem, thatƒ Ts why I am using replication. It was
suggested to me by management. I am also not allowed to share a DB
from a local machine, this is prohibited in our current
configuration. The current Replication scheme has been working,
but I am working with a lot of constraints. I thought about using
indirect but it didnƒ Tt seem to make sense at the time.

The solution I would propose is to host the app on a Windows
Terminal Server, thus eliminating any need for replication
whatsoever.

 

[fcabre]

Thanks for the help.

(e-mail address removed)

I don't understand why anyone needs partial replicas, but many
people seem to think they are a good idea. I would restrict access
in the application, since partial replication really has zilch to do
with read/write access.


....indicating that they are *not* on the same LAN...


The solution I would propose is to host the app on a Windows
Terminal Server, thus eliminating any need for replication
whatsoever.