Jim Hewson
JHewson at karta.com
Tue May 16 14:30:52 CDT 2006
I concur. I have several databases that use the BE/FE split. I use the UNC path with no problems. The shortcut vs. file on the user's machine debate is an issue that needs to be addressed. I did learned (from this list) - once loaded, it's faster to have the FE on the user's machine; especially if several queries run when opening the main form. If the path to the BE does not change, it's quite easy to move the FE without relinking. For example: The BE is located on C:\Data. The FE can reside anywhere on the machine. That includes my Dev Machine; since I have a directory C:\Data on my machine. The user can place the modified FE anywhere on the C: Drive and it will run correctly. Also, if the path is UNC, the FE can be placed anywhere on the network. Jim jhewson at karta.com -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Gustav Brock Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 1:38 PM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] To re-link or not to re-link... Hi Bobby In my experience you don't even need to go that "far". Just open a mandatory table and catch the error. If success, fine; if fail, either the backend has been moved or - more likely - a network error exists or the drive mapping has been lost or the backend is corrupted. Each of these errors calls for very different further checks as well as messages to and actions from the user. But still no relinking - as soon as the error has been corrected, the app will run again. /gustav >>> bheid at appdevgrp.com 16-05-2006 17:33:14 >>> Thanks everyone for your input. I think we'll try the one table relink thing that several have suggested. I'll also look at making sure I have a connection to the BE when I do have to re-link all of the tables (the user switch back ends every now and then). Thanks again, Bobby -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Charlotte Foust Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 11:12 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: [AccessD] To re-link or not to re-link... Thanks for the memory boost, Jim. I knew I had encountered it but couldn't remember the details. Charlotte -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim Dettman Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 5:29 PM To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' Subject: Re: [AccessD] To re-link or not to re-link... Charlotte, A2 had "attachment fatigue". For no apparent reason, at some point, linked tables would simply stop working. A lot of developers got into the habit of re-linking at startup every time. I myself check one table in each BE and if it can't open the table, I force a re-link of all the tables associated with that BE. I prompt the user for the location of the BE to, so if it's been moved or it's un-available, they can correct it. Jim. -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Charlotte Foust Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:40 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: [AccessD] To re-link or not to re-link... It seems to me there were some issues in the early versions if the linked database were not available (moved, renamed, network down) because the condition seemed to persist even when the linked file became available again, but I may be misremembering. In any case, that was overcome long ago and may have had more to do with the OS than with Access itself. Charlotte Foust -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Gustav Brock Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 9:09 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] To re-link or not to re-link... Hi Bobby We've never (since and including Access 2.0) seen any issues by _not_ relinking at every launch of the app. That's for JET tables. Neither have I seen such a need for SQL Server. It may be different for other (ODBC connected) engines though. Why not just disable the relinking and watch what happens? /gustav >>> bheid at appdevgrp.com 15-05-2006 17:33 >>> Hey, We have a system that was originally developed in Access 97. There were a number of tables that were linked to the FE. There were issues (not sure what they were as no one remembers and I did not write the original) with the system if the tables were not re-linked each time the system is loaded. Well, here we are today and the app has grown into Access XP. The system has grown and now has over 100 tables. As such, it takes about .6 seconds per table to re-link them all. Does anyone know what the issues may have been before and if they still exist in Access XP? Anyone have any pointers to further information? Thanks, Bobby -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com