Bonafide Need to Remerge Split Database

[Gary Schuldt]

We are participating in a beta test of MS FolderShare, which uses an
internet connection to automatically serially sync files on different
computers.

We want to use an existing MS database for the test. Unfortunately, the
particular database we want to use is currently split, and the split causes
unnecessary work of relinking tables when the next round-robin user opens
the db.

The backend consists of 10 tables with relationships that are linked to the
frontend. I simply want to replace the links in the FE with the actual
tables from the BE.

When I try to import a table that's already linked, Access appends a "1" to
the imported table name. If I try to delete the link first, Access tells me
I have to delete the relationships first.

I don't want to lose the relationships I've established!

I'm hoping there's a painless way to accomplish the merging of the BE with
the FE without potentially losing part of my structure.

TIA

Gary

 

[John Vinson]

I'm hoping there's a painless way to accomplish the merging of the BE with
the FE without potentially losing part of my structure.

One way is to copy in the other direction.

Make a COPY of the backend (you may want the tables-only backend at
some point). Open it; use File... Get External Data... Import to
import all of the OTHER stuff - Forms, Queries, Reports, Macros,
Modules - from the frontend.

Alternatively, you can (again) make a copy of the frontend; boldly
delete all of the tables (don't worry, this just deletes the links)
and use File... Get External Data... Import to import (not link!) the
tables from the backend. There is an option on the Import screen to
import relationships along with the tables.

John W. Vinson[MVP]

 

[Gary Schuldt]

Thanks much, John.

I had thought of alternative #1 but rejected it as "inelegant"; in
retrospect, it looks as though it would have been the less painful (no
popups about first deleting relationships when you try to delete a table
link).

Instead, I chose alt. #2, and it appears to have worked fine after a quick
test of functionality.

I think the operable word in your advice was "boldly"!

Gary Schuldt