I am building a database which will be used by around 30 people at the same time. When telephone calls come in they will log the details.
I dont need anything to explicit.
I have one table, around six queries and 3 reports.
I will be using one form with a save button and next record button and a switchboard.
The users will log on at the same time and will log all telephone calls thoughout the day.
Will the database work with so many people using it at the same time or do I have to change the properties.

You should defenitly split the db into a Front End and a Back end. Also you will want to enforce record-level locking instead of page-level locking.

Thanks Keith
I understand the record level locking but what is a Front End and Back End.

you dont want 30 users (or even 2 users) opening the same database on a network. What you do is split the database into 2 - one database consists of your data, and the other your code. each user gets a copy of the code on their own pc (front end - fe), and they all reference the same data (backend be),. In some case you have to recode as eg seek will not work on a split database, but generally there is no problem. there is a wizard to split the tables in access

Thanks for the help.
I tried splitting a test database on my pc and it seems easy enough.
The db which has the table is the back end and the db with the forms, queries, switchoard etc is the front end.
Question:- Can I keep both of these in a shared drive and allow all 30 users to access the front end db and have it open at the same time to input the information
Sorry for sounding stoopid.
If I am on the wrong track can you explain what I need to do as we access a shared drive for all files but we also have access to our own folders to keep our own stuff in.

you definitely should not let users share a single copy of the dbs. if you are using a TS, then they should each login into their own folder and run a separate copy. one particular reason is that if any of your apps write temporary tables into the single copy database, then multiple users changing this table will definitely cause issues.

I am sure other posters can explain in a lot more detail why sharing the fe, or sharing an unslit dbs is never sound.

Thanks again.
This will probably explain the problems I have with other db's I built which were not split. I do a backup copy each week just in case of corruption.
Should I create 30 copies of the fe db (with the switchboard/form in it) and rename each one for individual users. Then put each copy in their individual folders, leaving the be db in the shared drive.
All users open their copy and input info which will be sent to the back end database.

Yes, you should have thirty copies of the fe, one in each of the users home folders. you don't need to rename the front ends - if users have their own folders they should only be able to open their own copy of the dbs.

If you have not split databases before have a look at the help, and have a play with it first. What happens is that after the split, the front end contains program code, forms, reports etc, and the back end contains the data. The table names remain unchanged (allthough they don't have to) and the table appears with a black arrow, showing it is connected rather than local. If you are using SQL or other be database such as FoxPro, the connection shows as a World Symbol, or another symbol. Generally the split database is transparent - although there are some functions that work differently in a split dbs.

One benefit of a split dbs, is that the data remains intact. You can develop an improved front end, and you can distribute this to your users with no impact on the data.

Often the developer will load the new improved fe dbs into a common shared folder, and force the users to use this version by checking a version number in the fe dbs against the be dbs. You may need to provide a simple copy command file on the users desktop to collect the latest version. I am sure there are loads of suggestions and code samples on this forum regarding this.

Thanks Gemma
This will be my first time trying to split and I made a few tests on another db. Should be OK.
There are only 10 entries for each call and I have the table and everything set up so I wont be making any changes to it.
In the meantime I will look at your suggestion re altering the main db and using the copy command for updates for future builds.
This forum has been a great asset to me and I have had answers to questions I couldnt find in books so many thanks to everyone.