backend storage and primisions (1 Viewer)

[eshai]

hi:
i have a workgroup with 5 ms access db(can grow) it's all LAN with 1GB
there is 10 pc's(can grow) working on the DB. the backend tables are stored in one of the pc's
my Q is i have to build a server no question about it
my problem that i don't want Start messing around with windows server a lot of work for now
so i was I thought about NAS server "Synology" have a nice gui and share options, backup etc' and i also need it for storage Other things
BTW all the work Is done on the front end pc's they are strong so no backend hardware needed only R\W speed
What is your opinion?

​

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I've seen articles on Synology. Not sure you need to go that far. I will not say it can't work but I am uncertain after what I read. Let's say I have some misgivings about file locking management. It is always your choice, but it is a choice I wouldn't make.

IF you have the money for it, build a decent desktop with memory and some really nice built-in disk storage. Set up Windows File Sharing across your network. DO NOT have anyone except perhaps an administrator ever log in to that desktop. No users! Set up a folder for the desktop to hold the BE file You can have a second folder to act as the repository for the "master official copy" of the FE file.

Set up UNC mapping within your in-house network. Set up the master official FE copy to UNC-map to the BE file. Search this forum for auto-update (as a way to distribute new versions of the FE file). Never let users execute the master FE copy directly. That stand-alone workstation would have plenty of "oomph" for file sharing, which is all that you need with Access.

As you point out, since all the work would be done on the FE's host machines, the BE host doesn't need to be extraordinarily robust. Though you would want it to have good disk and network response, it only needs basic Window10.

 

[eshai]

thanks for the replay
my Issue is more the permissions and user management so user's accounts will be managed from a server

 

[Galaxiom]

Move your backend to SQL Server Express. Then you can use SQL Server logins to manage permissions.

It will run on Win10 and is free. It will also move your database capability from 2GB in Access up to 10GB. You may need to put in some extra work to optimise for the server.

However it is lot smoother to have a Windows domain and use Windows permissions.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

If by that you mean that you will have a formal domain environment, great! That does simplify a lot of things. Since you expressed concern about permissions, let me plant this idea into your brain.

Create a group-name under this Windows domain. Make that group-name convey MODIFY rights to the folder and files where the BE file will be kept. Now grant group membership to the users who will use that DB, and have a second set of permissions that is either READ-ONLY or NO ACCESS. Since rights are tested in order, you always put the "least permissive" case last. Which means "Administrator" and "System" will be first, usually with FULL CONTROL, "Operator" next with either FULL CONTROL or a subset of the 22 low-level permissions implied by FULL CONTROL. Then comes your group identifier with MODIFY, and then finally "Everyone" last. (Some IT folks would put "Authenticated Users" before "Everyone" if they wanted to make a difference in permissions.)

What is the moral of the story? Grant permissions based on groups because it becomes TRIVIAL to add or remove someone in a group. One action and you are done! That's the easy way to manage permissions.