Error 3734 - Passive Shutdown - locking out users

[Guest]

I have a multiuser database that has been working fine for many months. In
the last 2 weeks the users are getting the error 3734 if someone is in the
database and then the new users are not able to access the database. I can't
find anything about this except that it is a "feature". There seems to be
some parameter that is being set by the first user that sets the database in
a "State". It doesn't matter who the first user it. Any help? I really
need to get this database back in multi-user mode tomorrow! Database is in
Access 2003. Thanks.

 

[Brendan Reynolds]

Here's a link to a KB article that might help ...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/287655/EN-US/

 

[Albert D. Kallal]

Two possible reasons

1) The user opening the file does not have create/delete rights to where the
data file is placed. IF ms-access can't create temp files (for multi user
locking), them ms-access will start in single user (exclusive) mode. So, if
the first person in does not have full rights to where the data file is,
then single user mode can result.

2) It is very possible that the one user is opening the file in exclusive
mode (exclusive means exact that.....no other person can use the
application).
check out

tools->options->advanced tab
Take a look at "default open mode"

you have two options....Exclusive, or shared. You want to use
shared.

However, the above problem should NOT have occurred.

You don't mention if your database is split. However, can you imagine if one
user had a problem with word in your office, and then EVERYONE had that
problem?

What this means is that you need to ensure that your appcation is split.
Other wise the problem of one becomes the problem of many. This just simply
means that you are wasting support money that could feed the poor, go to
charity, or simply save your company money. I don't think you need to be
told that throwing money away is something that most companies don't like.

So, check the default settings for that person.

Further, to properly setup multi user, you need to place a copy of the
application part on EACH computer. That way, if one computer changes its
settings, or is messed up, you don't pass that problem to everyone else.

I explain why, and in detail as to what this split idea is all about is
here:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/split/index.htm

So, check your settings, and read the above article....

 

[Guest]

Hello,

Thanks for your quick reply. The database is not split - because the client
did not want it to be done - despite good arguements for creating the split
database. Everyone has access rights to the shared drive and I have checked
each user and the application and the database is set to be opened in shared
mode. The message I get is not the usual "the database has been opened
exclusively..." but this message about the database has been put into a
'state' with error # 3734. So I am still confused.

 

[Guest]

Hello,

Thanks for the link. I had already looked at it and it seemed to tell me
how to lock users out - and I want to let them in. Did I miss something in
the KB?

 

[Albert D. Kallal]

The message I get is not the usual "the database has been opened
exclusively..." but this message about the database has been put into a
'state' with error # 3734. So I am still confused.

Gee, that sounds likely the file was damaged. This ill occur quite
frequently when you allow multiple users into the program code part.

You should be able to fix this with a compact and repair. However, unless
you split, this will become a common occurrence.

However, since they don't want to split, you just have to train them how to
compact and repair, and live with data loss on a frequent basis.

I given the solutions to you, but , as you mentioned, it seems your hands
are tied in this case. You just have to teach them to live with this problem
if they can't implement the fix as suggested.

 

[Brendan Reynolds]

Because you mentioned 'Passive Shutdown' in the subject line, I got the idea
that you were seeing a reference to 'passive shutdown' in the error message.
That's why I thought the KB article might help. But it seems that's not the
case?