FE/BE Just what should I expect?

[Joe8915]

Ok, guys I just did it. After reading most of the Threads on FE/BE. I am running Access 2007 on a net work. I have about 60 users plus. Not all users on the database at the same time of course. I can see the split database running a little faster, but not much. The big difference is the size. The same database that is not split is 148Kb the database that is split is 52kb. What I was hoping a lot faster, but that did not happen. I guess it must be a server problem.
Now I am thinking is it worth it. I will say Access 2003 ran a lot better and error free than 2007.
Any thoughts?

 

[Banana]

There are several factors why it may have not been effective.

To start with, did you search in MSDN for information about optimizing client/server performance with Access? This will give you some tips on how to improve performance.

Also, there are several reasons why it may be slower after split, especially if it wasn't designed with split as a consideration in the plan. For example, binding a form to table is much slower than binding form to a query with a WHERE condition. Furthermore using linked table as a rowsource for a combobox can seriously degrade the performance so all lookups table should be local in the FE.

 

[Joe8915]

Banana, good point. I will do the search in MSDN. It seems to be a little faster, but not that much after the split. I will have a few more users sign on and see what happens. I guess I was going for some lighting speed. I have many tables linking and as well forms and sub forms using calulations.

Access 2003 ran so quick. I was expecting the same for Access 2007. In the mean time I will take a close look at the MSDM.

Thanks for the Hot Tip

 

[LPurvis]

Hi

Splitting your application into a FE and BE isn't a panacea for improving performance.
It's the recommended distribution procedure for many reasons.

If you have a large application - then not having to load the forms, reports and code over the network can be a real time saver (and network kindness).
However at just 148Kb there was almost nothing to save in that respect.
FWIW Access does load and work with linked tables more slowly than local ones.
That doesn't change the fact that a distinct BE is very important - especially with multiple users.

With such a small file I'm not sure what could legitimately be causing any performance problems (in that even if there were some poorly formed requests for data - it shouldn't present too badly.

Where, exactly, are you noticing slowness?

 

[Joe8915]

Lpurvis, thanks for the response. I never thought of that. I mean I knew it would be (network kindness), but I thought it would speed up the performance. I did take Banna advise and look into the "MSDN about optimizing client/server performance". I did find one item "Disable Name AutoCorrect". I disable that item. I don't know what is going to happen since I have not tested as of yet.

I will keep this thread live and let everyone what happens.

Thanks again

 

[LPurvis]

Disabling AutoCorrupt is a good idea in itself.
If you're interested in performance considerations then there's no better source than Tony Toews reference http://www.granite.ab.ca/Access/performancefaq.htm

 

[georgedwilkinson]

Disabling AutoCorrupt is a good idea in itself.

AutoCorrupt? Please elaborate.

 

[Banana]

Allen Browne can elaborate on the AutoCorrupt.

 

[LPurvis]

Sorry - you mentioned "Disable Name AutoCorrect", I was just referring to that.
"AutoCorrupt" is a semi-affectionate name for "AutoCorrect". Given to it by those who love Access enough to hate parts of it in good humour. ;-)

It, and many other such issues, are discussed on that performance FAQ.
(And Allen's site too of course).

Cheers.

 

[Joe8915]

Ok, so here I am looking all over for that damn "AutoCorrupt", thank god you sent the email, or I still be looking.

Just kidding

 

[Banana]

Well, it's undocumented feature, you know... Gonna need that thingamigjig to gain access to the feature.

 

[Joe8915]

Sometimes you read the information and you ask yourself, does that apply to 2007

 

[gemma-the-husky]

buried away in the suggestions in the Purvis link is a reference to

MS Knowledge Base article 889588

among other things, this has a reference to sharing violation notification delay - make sure you install that fix in particular - its an otherwise completely harmless registry amendment

 

[Joe8915]

Thanks for the Hot Tip, I will have my IT people take a look at that. I can only explore so much on my computer, due to my restrictions.

Trying to understand just what does the "Disable Name AutoCorrect", really do?

 

[Joe8915]

Thanks for the Hot Tip, I will have my IT people take a look at that. I can only explore so much on my computer, due to my restrictions.

Trying to understand just what does the "Disable Name AutoCorrect", really do?

Ok, I found out what it does