Combining Split database or easier way to update forms?

[jdetterline]

Hi,

I've split my database into a front end and back end which was relatively easy. I did this so that multiple users can have their own front end. But if I have to go in and change the back end and front end, does that mean I have to remake all the front ends? Right now I'm finding that if I delete my linked tables on the front end and then import them into the back end again and change everything on one screen and then split it again is the only option I know of. I'm hoping I'm doing it wrong and there is a better more efficient way.

 

[plog]

But if I have to go in and change the back end and front end, does that mean I have to remake all the front ends?

Probably. You're going to have to be more specific.

You should have a backend (BE) and a master front end (MFE). If anything changes in the MFE, obviously to get those changes to users, you will have to send them a new copy of the MFE.

If something changes in the BE, you may or may not need to. Really depends on what it is. If it affects a form or a query in the front end, then yes.

I generally do this:

Create a /DatabaseFolder on a network drive. In it I have BE and a front end for each user (FE1, FE2, FE3, FE4, etc.). I also have a subdirectory which holds my MFE and various development folders where I develop new modules for the database. Then the user gets a shortcut to a front end, not the actual front end.

So when I need to update front ends, I simply replace all those FE files and the user has no clue that it got updated because they are using a short cut.

 

[jdetterline]

Darn. I was afraid of that. That's how I did it.. It was nice and pretty until everyone saw how nice it was then piled a list of 100 things to add in which made me teach them about throat punching.

 

[bob fitz]

Probably.

I generally do this:

Create a /DatabaseFolder on a network drive. In it I have BE and a front end for each user (FE1, FE2, FE3, FE4, etc.). I also have a subdirectory which holds my MFE and various development folders where I develop new modules for the database. Then the user gets a shortcut to a front end, not the actual front end.

So when I need to update front ends, I simply replace all those FE files and the user has no clue that it got updated because they are using a short cut.

Hi plog. Are you saying that each user doesn't actually have a copy of the FE on their own machine. I have little personal experience in these matters but my understanding of "conventional wisdom" was that an arrangement such as this would make network traffic high and would result in forms that open slowly. Is that not correct.

 

[plog]

Correct, each user only has a shortcut to a FE on the network. I've never had any major/continuining issues with performance. Of course the most users I've ever had access to one of my systems is 20 and rarely more than 5 at the same time.

 

[jdetterline]

Ah. I've actually created folders on our server just in a different subfolder than the actual back end. So we have user folders. I just went in to each persons user folder and just copied the FE's in there and renamed them to their name. I'm thinking this is the same as if I put them in the same folder?

 

[plog]

Yeah, that sounds like it accomplishes the same thing. Take the users out of the equation of having to deal with handling new versions of the FE.