John Skolits
askolits at ot.com
Tue May 13 09:14:08 CDT 2003
MessageSo if I understand this, you suggest foregoing the FE/BE design,
place everything in one DB and use replication? HMMM interesting.
But, if I have 5 of 7 users on a local network, I would want their data
refreshes to be immediate on the data tables. The remote users won't care if
they refresh only periodically.
I would think that in this scenario, I would prefer to have a FE/BE design
on the local network with the one shared BE being a replica. On the remotes,
I would also want FE/BE design but all their individual BEs be separate
replicas.
But, now I'm mixing a shared BE and remote replica BEs. Is this a bad idea?
In addition, I like the idea of one replica on a local server (sub-hub)
managed by a synchronizer and then synchronized with the main hub replica.
But, I thought each replica on the satellite PCs had to have a drop box. If
that's so, don't you have to install RepMnger on each PC have to have the
drop boxes?
Gee, a lot to learn.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Arthur Fuller
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 9:06 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase
No you do not have to install RM on each machine. I have quite a bit of
experience (and good stories) with RM, so allow me....
In my first experiments with replication, I needed to replicate a db among
4 branch offices connected over the net with a vpn. In this phase, each
office had a server that was being hit by each local pc. The server at HQ
had the synchronizer installed, and it replicated among the office servers
every 15 minutes. It worked flawlessly. Then I got to thinking that this
same scenario would work locally, and eliminate 90% of the net traffic that
a classic FE/BE would normally incur. So I set up a synchronizer on each
branch server, and a replica on each local pc. The branch server
synchronized the local pcs with the server BE every 5 minutes, and the HQ
server synchronized the branch server replicas.
All replicas were set up as managed replicas, save one: the master
replica, which resided on my development box, alongside my own managed
replica. When I modified tables etc. and changed the FE to work against the
master correctly, tested etc., I was then ready to publish the changes. I
manually synched my master replica with my local replica. Five minutes later
it synched with the branch replica, propagating the changes both locally and
company-wide. It worked flawlessly for months, until eventually we migrated
to SQL 2000.
As a result of these experiments, I am now convinced that the classic
FE/BE setup is obsolete. The setup outlined above, even for a single office
with say 20 users, is dramatically faster than the classic layout.
Arthur
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of John Skolits
Sent: May 13, 2003 8:45 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase
Andrew,
Thanks for getting back to me. I looked at Mike's site (haven't been
there for a while- Gee I wish he had a search tool).
I also posted on the MS newsgroup and Mike responded. Here was his
comment:
"Do not use the briefcase. It is less painful to hit your hand with a
hammer
than to put yourself through that kind of pain.
MichKa [MS]"
I like the way he is so direct. Anyway, I've been doing a lot of reading
from newsgroup postings and I'm confused about one thing.
I'm getting the impression that I do have to install the Rep Mngr app on
each machine.
I'm thinking that I will want to periodically do indirect Sync to my hub
database but in order to do that, I will need the synchronizer on each PC.
Here is a posting that talks about it. Is this person wrong or do I
misunderstand something.
Go to the following link and select the posting with the topic: "What is
the best way to do this"
http://support.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.aspx?NewsGroup=microsoft.pub
lic.access.replication&SLCID=US&ICP=GSS3&sd=GN&id=fh;en-us;newsgroups
John
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Haslett, Andrew
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 11:06 PM
To: 'accessd at databaseadvisors.com'
Subject: RE: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase
Check out Michael Kaplans site:
http://www.trigeminal.com
He's the guru of Access Replication, and among other things, has made
his own 'replication manager' much more powerful than the one from MS. The
are a number of excellent articles on replication on his site also.
Additionally, you shouldn't need to install a replication manager on
each machine.
Cheers,
Andrew
----Original Message-----
From: John Skolits [mailto:askolits at ot.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 13 May 2003 1:34 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase
I'm trying to decide which is the best method to handle replication.
This will involve around 7 users.
I have 2 office locations: 1 in Philadelphia and 1 in Cleveland. The
are connected with an Asynchronous line. Therefore the data connection will
be slow. They will eventually switch to a regular T1 line, but not for a few
months.
I have looked at the Replication Manager which looks like a good fit
but I would have to install it on all the PC's and (I believe) have the
synchronizer running on the server where everyone would replicate to. I
would then do indirect synchronization.
Someone said they used the Briefcase to do the synchronizations.
With that method, I would not have to install Replication Manager on all the
PC's.
This is not mission critical information so the briefcase looks like
a better solution with much less programming overhead.
Anyone have any insights on this?
John
IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ ********************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may
contain information protected by law from disclosure.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete this email from your system.
No warranty is given that this email or files, if attached to this
email, are free from computer viruses or other defects. They
are provided on the basis the user assumes all responsibility for
loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or indirectly from
their use, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://databaseadvisors.com/pipermail/accessd/attachments/20030513/a2c45e19/attachment-0001.html>