K
k
What is the purpose of replication?
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
P
Pete D.
David Fenton is the guru on this, start here
http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page
http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page
D
David W. Fenton
What is the purpose of replication?
To allow two users in two different locations to make independent
edits that can then be synchronized with each other.
In Jet, only data can be reliably replicated. Microsoft's
documentation suggests using replication to push out updates to a
front end application, but this does not work in the long run (it
corrupts over time because Jet's replication subsystems don't handle
the Access objects well because the whole Access project is stored
in a single BLOB field in a single record of a system table).
The primary present-day application of Jet replication is to allow
disconnected laptop users to edit live data in the field without an
Internet connection and come back to the home office and synch their
changes with the main database.
N
NetworkTrade
also - and this displays my grey hair...... replication was first conceived
by the industry before the internet and when wide area nets were expensive,
thin, and not reliable...with very slow response times
working in separate local dbs and then consolidating was the more robust
solution
a web based solution designed from the ground up would be the method today
rather than replication......
by the industry before the internet and when wide area nets were expensive,
thin, and not reliable...with very slow response times
working in separate local dbs and then consolidating was the more robust
solution
a web based solution designed from the ground up would be the method today
rather than replication......
D
David W. Fenton
=?Utf-8?B?TmV0d29ya1RyYWRl?=
Not necessarily. Windows Terminal Server is the preferred method for
deploying Access apps in a networked environment.
But Jet Replication is awfully good for those wandering users who
need to edit data disconnected from the network. That's not what SQL
Server's replication is designed for, so it's likely more
complicated to implement (though Jet Replication is not without its
complexities if you want to sych across a WAN or non-wired LAN).
also - and this displays my grey hair...... replication was first
conceived by the industry before the internet and when wide area
nets were expensive, thin, and not reliable...with very slow
response times
working in separate local dbs and then consolidating was the more
robust solution
a web based solution designed from the ground up would be the
method today rather than replication......
Not necessarily. Windows Terminal Server is the preferred method for
deploying Access apps in a networked environment.
But Jet Replication is awfully good for those wandering users who
need to edit data disconnected from the network. That's not what SQL
Server's replication is designed for, so it's likely more
complicated to implement (though Jet Replication is not without its
complexities if you want to sych across a WAN or non-wired LAN).
D
David W. Fenton
David Fenton is the guru on this, start here
http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/Replication/index.php?title=Main_Page
I stand on the shoulders of giants like Michael Kaplan and Mary
Chipman.
N
NetworkTrade
but 'from the ground up'? where there is no embedded existing investment or
internal network?
for a new geographically distributed requirement would one today invest new
money in creating a brand new terminal server based solution or in a web
based solution?
I believe the latter though I would be interested to hear alternative
pros/cons
internal network?
for a new geographically distributed requirement would one today invest new
money in creating a brand new terminal server based solution or in a web
based solution?
I believe the latter though I would be interested to hear alternative
pros/cons
D
David W. Fenton
=?Utf-8?B?TmV0d29ya1RyYWRl?=
Yes, of course. Access will always be a cheaper and faster and more
feature-rich and more flexible platform than any web-based solution
(at least, until such time has we have the proposed richer HTML
forms model supported in all our browsers; the legacy forms model
really sucks in comparison to Access forms).
Developing a web-based app is quite expensive in comparison to an
Access app hosted on Terminal Server (assuming the same
functionality).
There's not enough information in your question to answer the
question.
Web development always takes more time and has fewer features than
an Access app. The resulting app is also going to be much slower (by
virtue of the stateless, unbound nature of browser-based apps).
I don't mean to argue that such investments are not worthwhile --
just that they are not always the best solution to the "distributed
data" problem. The larger the user population, the better return on
the investment in a browser-based app. But for reasonable user
populations (100 and fewer), the Terminal Server solution is going
to be the better investment, in my opinion (assuming you have
competent Access developers and competent system administration of
the Terminal Server infrastructure).
but 'from the ground up'? where there is no embedded existing
investment or internal network?
Yes, of course. Access will always be a cheaper and faster and more
feature-rich and more flexible platform than any web-based solution
(at least, until such time has we have the proposed richer HTML
forms model supported in all our browsers; the legacy forms model
really sucks in comparison to Access forms).
Developing a web-based app is quite expensive in comparison to an
Access app hosted on Terminal Server (assuming the same
functionality).
for a new geographically distributed requirement would one today
invest new money in creating a brand new terminal server based
solution or in a web based solution?
There's not enough information in your question to answer the
question.
I believe the latter though I would be interested to hear
alternative pros/cons
Web development always takes more time and has fewer features than
an Access app. The resulting app is also going to be much slower (by
virtue of the stateless, unbound nature of browser-based apps).
I don't mean to argue that such investments are not worthwhile --
just that they are not always the best solution to the "distributed
data" problem. The larger the user population, the better return on
the investment in a browser-based app. But for reasonable user
populations (100 and fewer), the Terminal Server solution is going
to be the better investment, in my opinion (assuming you have
competent Access developers and competent system administration of
the Terminal Server infrastructure).
N
NetworkTrade
I like the input. Clearly right now a web based solution is more development
cost overall. No question on that.
Less feature rich because unbound...; less sure on that point - - am not
advocating web based over Access - but I do think one can implement all of
the same features in a web solution if one is willing to spend the bucks...
slower - some times for sure ; particularly where the browser is at the
mercy of public network carriers....
Terminal Server definitely has its place. I surely would do it before
engaging replication technology. But once alot of locations are
involved....and I'm not sure what 'alot' is at this point...but when you get
alot of locations involved I think browser based is where the market is
going, meaning it will get cheaper and better....
Definitely something that input from others in the real world are valuable
for me...I believe replication was dropped in Access07 though don't quote me
on that...
cost overall. No question on that.
Less feature rich because unbound...; less sure on that point - - am not
advocating web based over Access - but I do think one can implement all of
the same features in a web solution if one is willing to spend the bucks...
slower - some times for sure ; particularly where the browser is at the
mercy of public network carriers....
Terminal Server definitely has its place. I surely would do it before
engaging replication technology. But once alot of locations are
involved....and I'm not sure what 'alot' is at this point...but when you get
alot of locations involved I think browser based is where the market is
going, meaning it will get cheaper and better....
Definitely something that input from others in the real world are valuable
for me...I believe replication was dropped in Access07 though don't quote me
on that...
D
David W. Fenton
=?Utf-8?B?TmV0d29ya1RyYWRl?=
By default, I've become something of the "Jet replication guru" and
I advocate TS over Jet replication in all cases where there's a
full-time Internet connection.
That hasn't changed, it seems to me. Ten years ago, browser-based
apps were preferable to replication for certain types of scenarios.
Indeed, I think that this is *less* so today (since the inclusion of
TS in Windows Server, starting with Windows Server 2000) than it was
ten years ago.
AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!
No, replication has not been dropped -- it is still supported for
MDBs. It is *not* supported in the new ACCDB format. Make of that
what you will.
Terminal Server definitely has its place. I surely would do it
before engaging replication technology.
By default, I've become something of the "Jet replication guru" and
I advocate TS over Jet replication in all cases where there's a
full-time Internet connection.
But once alot of locations are
involved....and I'm not sure what 'alot' is at this point...but
when you get alot of locations involved I think browser based is
where the market is going, meaning it will get cheaper and
better....
That hasn't changed, it seems to me. Ten years ago, browser-based
apps were preferable to replication for certain types of scenarios.
Indeed, I think that this is *less* so today (since the inclusion of
TS in Windows Server, starting with Windows Server 2000) than it was
ten years ago.
Definitely something that input from others in the real world are
valuable for me...I believe replication was dropped in Access07
though don't quote me on that...
AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!
No, replication has not been dropped -- it is still supported for
MDBs. It is *not* supported in the new ACCDB format. Make of that
what you will.
P
Pete D.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh
Did I start this, replication works as long as you pay attention to the
limits...although I don't know about guru, you were there when I was out
there trying to make it work. Oh, by the way, you proved your point to me,
even a B-2 bomber has it limits...apparently! By the way, we all learned
somewhere. I was just stuck with you... ; }
Did I start this, replication works as long as you pay attention to the
limits...although I don't know about guru, you were there when I was out
there trying to make it work. Oh, by the way, you proved your point to me,
even a B-2 bomber has it limits...apparently! By the way, we all learned
somewhere. I was just stuck with you... ; }
T
Tony Toews [MVP]
NetworkTrade said:I like the input. Clearly right now a web based solution is more development
cost overall. No question on that.
Less feature rich because unbound...; less sure on that point - - am not
advocating web based over Access - but I do think one can implement all of
the same features in a web solution if one is willing to spend the bucks...
slower - some times for sure ; particularly where the browser is at the
mercy of public network carriers....
Terminal Server definitely has its place. I surely would do it before
engaging replication technology. But once alot of locations are
involved....and I'm not sure what 'alot' is at this point...but when you get
alot of locations involved I think browser based is where the market is
going, meaning it will get cheaper and better....
Definitely something that input from others in the real world are valuable
for me...I believe replication was dropped in Access07 though don't quote me
on that...
I would also think that web browser makes more sense when dealing with
the general public. TS works better for people with a close relation
with your employer such as employees, sub contractors and such as it
requires a bit of more work to configure on the client end.
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
T
Tony Toews [MVP]
David W. Fenton said:I stand on the shoulders of giants like Michael Kaplan and Mary
Chipman.
I was thinking that Michka knew a lot but I didn't realize Mary did
too.
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
D
Douglas J. Steele
Tony Toews said:I was thinking that Michka knew a lot but I didn't realize Mary did
too.
She was one of the authors of the Microsoft Replication FAQ (along with
MichKa, Paul Litwin, and Steve Thompson)
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/182886
K
k
Thank you so much! I appreciate the succinct answer. I had some people
telling me it was about making a backup of database ???, I thought that
couldn't be right. Now I know and again thanks to you and all who responded.
telling me it was about making a backup of database ???, I thought that
couldn't be right. Now I know and again thanks to you and all who responded.
D
David W. Fenton
She was one of the authors of the Microsoft Replication FAQ (along
with MichKa, Paul Litwin, and Steve Thompson)
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/182886
And she was the author of many of the cool articles explaining how
to do replication that were published back in the days when
replication was new (or recently overhauled, as it was (much to the
better) with the release of Jet 4.0).
T
Tony Toews [MVP]
Douglas J. Steele said:She was one of the authors of the Microsoft Replication FAQ (along with
MichKa, Paul Litwin, and Steve Thompson)
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/182886
Ah, yes, of course. Thanks
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.