Software to Synchronize Access

[Mr. JYC]

Hello,

I would like to find out if software that does file synchronization (such as
GoodSync or SmartSync Pro) will synchronize Access databases in the same way
that Microsoft Replication Manager 4.0 does it. If it does, could you please
recommend some software to me?

 

[Arvin Meyer MVP]

Replication is built in to Access versions through Access 2003, and is still
usable with Access 2007 if you use the MDB format:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/282977/en-us

and David Fwnton's web pages at:

http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

[David W. Fenton]

I would like to find out if software that does file
synchronization (such as GoodSync or SmartSync Pro) will
synchronize Access databases in the same way that Microsoft
Replication Manager 4.0 does it. If it does, could you please
recommend some software to me?

What do you mean "in the same way?" It certainly won't use Jet
replication, and my guess is that it would be very, very unsafe with
a Jet MDB file. Certainly you would never want to run file system
synchronization software on an open database (just as you don't want
to use file system replication with Jet databases).

 

[Mr. JYC]

Hi Arvin,

Thank you for your reply. I went over the documentation. What I wanted to
find out was if there was a way to do Access replication over the Internet
without the use of IIS. I don't have a database server.

--
Thank you for your help!
JYC

Replication is built in to Access versions through Access 2003, and is still
usable with Access 2007 if you use the MDB format:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/282977/en-us

and David Fwnton's web pages at:

http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

[Mr. JYC]

Hi David,

Thank you for your response.

What I really need is a way to replicate an Access database over the
Internet without the use of IIS. Is there such a way?

 

[David W. Fenton]

What I really need is a way to replicate an Access database over
the Internet without the use of IIS. Is there such a way?

Yes. Indirect replication over a VPN. I explain how here:

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.access.replication/ms
g/3b7167c1462b2d2f

Also, see the Jet Replication Wiki for more details about related
topics:

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

 

[David W. Fenton]

and David Fwnton's web pages at:

http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page

Arvin, while I appreciate your pointing people to the Wiki, I
prefer if you used the shorter URL when posting it:

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

This will always work, since that's the way MediaWiki works.

 

[David W. Fenton]

I went over the documentation. What I wanted to
find out was if there was a way to do Access replication over the
Internet without the use of IIS. I don't have a database server.

Nothing on the Jet Replication Wiki suggests that you need a
database server. I directed you to a Google post of mine that is
cited in the Jet Replication Wiki FAQ:

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.access.replication/ms
g/3b7167c1462b2d2f

It does require a VPN, though. Without that, Internet replication
(which is hardwired to depend on IIS) is your only option. And it's
a bitch to configure, in fact.

But the instructions I give allow you to do everything that
Replication Manager provides. ReplMan is nothing but a really
half-assed GUI app with a handful of wizards that allow you to
configure and control Jet replication. You can easily build your own
interface that controls Jet replication without needing anything
other than the basic Jet replication components and a method for
connecting via SMB networking, which is where the VPN comes in.

 

[Arvin Meyer MVP]

Got it. Will do.

 

[Mr. JYC]

Hi David,

Thank you for your suggestions. I hope I am not aggravating you.

You are not going to believe this but what you suggested concerning VPN is
not going to work for several reasons. I do not have budget for new hardware
or licenses, have exisiting hardware that runs Linux (a file server), and no
control of the firewall. We are a subdomain under the control of a gestopo
umbrella IT department whose first concern is to make sure that no one gets
viruses!

So it's necessary to get very creative.

If it is not possible, please let me know.

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

You are not going to believe this .... We are a subdomain under the control of a gestopo
umbrella IT department whose first concern is to make sure that no one gets
viruses!

Oh no, we believe you.

Tony

 

[David W. Fenton]

If it is not possible, please let me know.

Under those circumstances, no, it's not possible using Jet
replication.

And I'd never run any Access app stored on a Linux file server --
native Windows file system is essential for Access (Jet) to run
reliably.

 

[Arvin Meyer MVP]

You are not going to believe this ... We are a subdomain under the control
of a gestopo
umbrella IT department whose first concern is to make sure that no one
gets
viruses!

And obviously no work done either. While many security professionals
disagree, the only responsible way to run a system is by managing risks. You
have to be able to conduct business profitably or there's nothing to protect
against viruses.

 

[James A. Fortune]

And I'd never run any Access app stored on a Linux file server --
native Windows file system is essential for Access (Jet) to run
reliably.

Granting that things may have changed in the last several years, I found
Access BE's running under Samba rather than SMB to be much, much more
reliable (and many times faster). The reasons for abandoning Linux
servers in a supporting role with Windows servers were purely political.
But nearly every employee remembers how much better it was with Linux.
The main drawback of using Samba under Linux is that if something
breaks you are on your own as far as troubleshooting or support goes
combined with a bit of a learning curve. But, IMO, Access/JET running
with BE's on Linux simply hauls. I can't speak for recent versions of
Samba and how well they keep up with Microsoft's innovations to SMB.
The fact that you can have unlimited users accessing the files on the
Linux box with absolutely zero licensing costs doesn't hurt either. You
should try it.

James A. Fortune
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Granting that things may have changed in the last several years, I found
Access BE's running under Samba rather than SMB to be much, much more
reliable (and many times faster). The reasons for abandoning Linux
servers in a supporting role with Windows servers were purely political.
But nearly every employee remembers how much better it was with Linux.
The main drawback of using Samba under Linux is that if something
breaks you are on your own as far as troubleshooting or support goes
combined with a bit of a learning curve. But, IMO, Access/JET running
with BE's on Linux simply hauls. I can't speak for recent versions of
Samba and how well they keep up with Microsoft's innovations to SMB.
The fact that you can have unlimited users accessing the files on the
Linux box with absolutely zero licensing costs doesn't hurt either. You
should try it.

Nice to hear some first hand information from a credible source.

Tony

 

[David W. Fenton]

Nice to hear some first hand information from a credible source.

I don't buy it. I've seen too many reports of problems. Perhaps
James's sysadmins were very smart with configuring Samba, but I just
don't think it's worth the risk. In an organization with a mix of
Linux and Windows servers, there's no reason to use anything but a
Windows server for storing back end MDBs. For an organization with
nothing but Linux servers, I question whether they should be using
Microsoft products at all.