[Accessd] FE/BE on server vs FE on workstation/BE on server?

one alternative is to put a little batch job on each worstation that copies the
FE from the server to the workstation. this will give you two advantages: no
bloat of the FE, since you always copy the fresh FE, and updating FE is easier
(only one location).
Lembit

Lembit Soobik

----- Original Message -----
From: "John W. Colby" <jcolby at ColbyConsulting.com>
To: <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 3:41 PM
Subject: RE: [Accessd] FE/BE on server vs FE on workstation/BE on server?


> Also the network traffic goes up, perhaps immensely.  With a shared FE on
> the server, every time a form is opened, the form and all queries for the
> form, combos etc have to be loaded over the network.  Likewise with reports.
>
> Using a shared FE is generally NOT considered a good idea by experienced
> developers.  If a single workstation has a flaky network connection, you can
> end up corrupting the FE.  If the FE corrupts, the entire set of users goes
> down until it is repaired.  If each user has his own copy on the desktop,
> this will not happen.
>
> John W. Colby
> Colby Consulting
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Marcus, Scott
> (GEAE, RHI Consulting)
> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 9:31 AM
> To: 'accessd at databaseadvisors.com'
> Subject: RE: [Accessd] FE/BE on server vs FE on workstation/BE on
> server?
>
>
> Bill,
>
> Forgot to mention that if the network goes down, you won't have any code
> that
> runs to detect this. You'll have no control over the error message that is
> displayed.
>
> Access still needs to be on the users machine (if you aren't using terminal
> services to run this thing).
>
> Also, database bloat will probably happen at an accelerated rate.
>
> I'm sure there are other issues. These just came to mind immediately.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Morrill [mailto:bmorrill at attbi.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 9:14 AM
> To: AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: [Accessd] FE/BE on server vs FE on workstation/BE on server?
>
>
> 4-14-03
>
> For sometime I have been putting frontends(forms, queries, reports etc) on
> workstation machines and backends(tables) on server.  Links would then be
> made from each workstation to the server.
>
> Recently, a user mentioned that they were using the same database
> frontend/backend on the server.  Each user would activate the frontend on
> the server and then the backend on the server would of course be linked to
> the frontend.  They said this shared backend/frontend situation worked fine
> and that there was no need to put the frontend on each workstation.
>
> Anyone know the ramifications for this frontend/backend on server idea?
> Does this impact the network performance?  Does this reduce the maximum
> number of concurrent users?  Would Access have to be installed on the server
> to make this viable?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Is email taking over your day?  Manage your time with eMailBoss.
> Try it free!  http://www.eMailBoss.com
>


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


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