[AccessD] Access & Multiple Users

First consideration would surely be the cost of all those 'Access' licences
where a 'front-end' is the 'free' run-time

Second consideration would (for me) be the maintenance  -
If 'management' want it to be a 'controlled' environment.

Third consideration - staff capability and training costs

Fourth Data validation, a front-end with forms should allow 'validation' to 
ensure that the data is as expected
It also means that a declaration can be made to courts etc. that updates 
etc. are recorded, traceable, identifiable and can, acceptably be presented 
'in/as evidence' as needed.

Fifth- If the staff are capable, and accept that they do what they do on 
their 'own' copy of data, with whatever risks devolved onto them - then why 
not let them do their thing.
In many environments it may well be better to allow the users to have their 
own database rather than intrude on the corporate ones. It also allows 
'management' to indicate that access to their 'work' is secure, and 
restricted to them.

I have frequently setup small data-stores to assist me in the monitoring., 
manipulation, and  management of 'stuff' I was responsible for, but would 
have had trouble justifying to be held as corporate data rather than just a 
working aid.

But - now I have access to a reasonably useful Excel facility - and I know 
not to set the file(s) as shared, or to bypass the data input validation 
without running a checking script in it's place.

JimB


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Clark" <John.Clark at niagaracounty.com>
To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" 
<accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:00 PM
Subject: [AccessD] Access & Multiple Users


I've got an Access 101 question...maybe 102...

I've been programming in Access for more than 10 yrs now, and early on I'd 
learned that, if I wanted multiple users to access my DBs (i.e. most of 
them), I needed to split them into Front-End programs w/forms and such, 
accessing Back-Ends which house the data. This is the way I've been doing 
things for all these years. BUT...I never really ever got any definitive 
word on how necessary this was...or at what point.

For me, I like how I do it. It isn't much more work, and I've enjoyed a 
great track record, w/very few problems regarding corruption, accessibility, 
etc.. But, now I am faced w/an issue, and I want to back up what I am 
telling my users w/some solid information...actually I just want to know 
that I'm not blowing smoke and I know what I am talking about...

We are in the process of migrating over, from a Novell network to a Windows 
AD network. We just moved out 2nd of five servers/campuses over and this one 
apparently has many Access DBs on it. More troublesome is that it has many 
user-created DBs on it. All the DBs I created are fine...nice feather in my 
cap there, eh?! But, there are several issues...at least a half-dozen at the 
moment...w/the user-created ones.

Most of these issues seem to be that they were previously being used by 
multiple people at the same time, and they can no longer do this. I've told 
the person that I am in contact w/over there that, they aren't really meant 
to be operated this way, so there really isn't anything for me to "fix."

So, this brings us to my questions...

1) What IS the rule w/simultaneous access? Is it correct that this shouldn't 
be done...is there a size or something that it will work up to?

2) for my own curiosity...why did it work w/Novell, but w/it came over to 
Active Directory it now longer worked? I'm guessing since it is all MS now, 
it is integrated enough to be know better...???

I'm guessing this is a mix of Access versions. I'm sure most of mine should 
be at least at the 2003 level, but nothing much older than that.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> -- 
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>