corruption in general

[Darth Vodka]

hi

i'm getting annoyed by Access 2003 (and 97 for that matter!) just corrupting records in a table and then i have to scrabble around, kicking people out the database, compact & repairing, maybe installing the back up copy and in one case, doing a make table query from the data table that excluded the corrupted record



are there any general things i can do to avoid these things, or am i just going to have to roll with them?

 

[valheru]

Hey

I use an access system in an multi user environment and generally find that corruption takes place when users do not disconnect from the system correctly. i.e not closing the database properly.

Another thing I have experienced is that when problems on our network occur, such as users being disconnected from the network while working on the system, the data usually becomes corrupted.

I have code now in place which can detect if a user has shut down properly and logs an event if not.

In general though, if you are working in an environment where lots of users are accessing a database it's always a good thing to run a compact and repair daily.

 

[davea300]

Are you using a split database? Corruption in a multi user system will be much more common if they are all sharing the same front end. Front end back end split can reduce the problem.

 

[Darth Vodka]

it's split. but the front end is not local, it's a network one they use

also, i think it's these fiddly sub-forms i have, with Dynaset Inconsistent updates on.....?

but that was the only way i could get to up date the queries benath them...

 

[DCrake]

Simple Software Solutions

Another important item to consider is wireless connections. Access it terrible for corrupting databases when a sudden drop is encountered. Any loss of connection, ever for a nano second, can cause Access to corrupt, especially if in the middle of performing and update/append/etc.

Avoid at all costs.

CodeMaster:

 

[Rabbie]

Firstly it would be a good idea for each user to have the FE local on their own computers.

Secondly see this link for advice on avoiding corruption.

 

[Darth Vodka]

Firstly it would be a good idea for each user to have the FE local on their own computers.

Secondly see this link for advice on avoiding corruption.

great link, thanks

as for local FEs...oooof, effort

it's a continually evolving database, to roll out table/query/form changes to multiple users would be a lot of time for something that works 99% of the time

 

[Rabbie]

great link, thanks

as for local FEs...oooof, effort

it's a continually evolving database, to roll out table/query/form changes to multiple users would be a lot of time for something that works 99% of the time

Bob Larson has developed a handy system for keeping the FE database upto date. This should ease the workload. I can't find the link just know but it has been referenced lots of times on these forums.

 

[Mike375]

Looks like I have been lucky.

I have the netork across wireless and have done so for a few years. I also learnt today that another potential corrupter I have is that the back end or hoem data base is a complete with forms and everything and is used. In fact it is the one I use.

My data base has some complex code but it is only involved with manipulation of Word and that part of the data base is never used while other people are on the other computers and is only done on the home computer or backend.

I get quite a few drop outs with the wireless but so far the only problem is failure to complete something runnin after a click/macro etc

The data base is used virtually non stop throughout the day since the data base is used for a telemarketing business.

 

[Darth Vodka]

Bob Larson has developed a handy system for keeping the FE database upto date. This should ease the workload. I can't find the link just know but it has been referenced lots of times on these forums.

I've actually got my hands on a database that does a FE roll out as users log in and I can see the principles and understand the code...

Just annoyed that Access gets confused at two people in a Dynaset Inconsistent subform updating two records



If it happens again, I'll dive in and do it..

many thanks all