Is there any point in converting a back end database to an MDE?

[David Anderson]

With an Access 2000 database that has been split into a back end containing
all the tables and a front end containing everything else, is there any
point in converting the back end from an MDB to a MDE file?

David

 

[Rick Brandt]

With an Access 2000 database that has been split into a back end
containing all the tables and a front end containing everything else,
is there any point in converting the back end from an MDB to a MDE
file?
David

Not really. It would prevent someone from building new forms, reports, and
modules in that file, but why anyone would want to do that is beyond me. It
would do nothing that affects the tables which is the primary reason for the
file.

 

[Guest]

David:

Quite the opposite. A .mde file is version specific, so if someone updates
to a later version of Access they can easily create a new front end .mde file
from the original development copy of the .mdb file. This could not be done
with a .mde back end file, however, as its only the .mde file which contains
the up to date data, not the .mdb file from which it was created. It would
be necessary to import the data from the .mde file into a .mdb file in the
version of Access in which it was created for the data to be accessible in a
later version of Access.

Ken Sheridan
Stafford, England

 

[David Anderson]

Thanks, guys. I just wanted to be sure I was not missing some obscure
benefit of the MDE format in these circumstances. I shall leave my back end
database as an MDB.

David

 

[David Anderson]

I might have been a little hasty in rejecting the MDE format. My back end
MDB file is 4.2MB, even after several Compact & Repair procedures. However
an MDE derived from this database is only 1.4MB. Can anyone explain this?

David

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

No logical reason that I can see.

Try creating a new database and importing the tables from the existing one
into the new one and see what the size is.

 

[David W. Fenton]

I might have been a little hasty in rejecting the MDE format. My
back end MDB file is 4.2MB, even after several Compact & Repair
procedures. However an MDE derived from this database is only
1.4MB. Can anyone explain this?

Does it stay that size after use? I strongly doubt that it would.

 

[David W. Fenton]

With an Access 2000 database that has been split into a back end
containing all the tables and a front end containing everything
else, is there any point in converting the back end from an MDB to
a MDE file?

If you took the time to understand what an MDE is, then I think
you'd realize that there is no benefit to having a back end in MDE
format.

 

[David Anderson]

I did indeed read the definition of an MDE and could see no reason why it
would be useful for a back end. I only raised the question to confirm that
there was no obscure and less frequently documented reason for exploiting
the MDE format in these circumstances. It now seems clear that there is not
(thus confirming my original assumption), so it will remain as an MDB.

David