[AccessD] relations in which database

Besides, you can't enforce referential integrity from another database.
Well, I suppose you could if you're willing to write the right code, but you
can't use the built-in ri feature.

Susan H.


> Marcel,
>
> Since relationships are between and among tables, and since the tables
> reside in the BE, why do you think the relationships should be in the FE
> and not the BE?  Also, I do not understand your so-called advantages?
> Please explain.
>
> Charles Wortz
> Software Development Division
> Texas Education Agency
> 1701 N. Congress Ave
> Austin, TX 78701-1494
> 512-463-9493
> CWortz at tea.state.tx.us
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcel Vreuls [mailto:marcel.vreuls at oop.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday 2003 Jun 04 07:57
> To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: [AccessD] relations in which database
>
> Dear group,
>
> I am stugling with the following. In our current situation I have a FE
> and a BE database. The relationships are currently stored in the BE
> database. Now the question is why not put them in the FE database and
> just leave the plain tables in the be database.
>
> Advantages should be
> - performance in multiuser env.
> - more control over the database because with each update you can
> change, add a relationship
> - peoplo who want to access the database through excel, and so on have
> more trouble in comprending the database.
> - field updates, new tables are easily to create instead of using 3rd
> party backend updaters
>
> Are there disadvantages???
>
> Thanks,
>
> marcel vreuls
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>