google ms remote desktop app to run msaccess

FuzMic

DataBase Tinker
Local time
Today, 20:59
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Messages
744
Hi gurus

Based on what I have seen happening with the Total Commander app, that can easily access any files in the shared folder via wifi; I am now thinking of a project in which i will use an android tabloid (chosen because of costs) to access an msaccess front end in a remote accessible pc.

I will try my hands on Google Ms Remote Desktop App to give it a go.

Alternative i can use a win10 laptop to do the same.

PS: Just read about Jump Desktop that CJ London had directed in one of the threads, look very promising.

Any views appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Already been able to remote access using the free accesstogo to Vista but ..

in remote access to win10 there is an error "RDP server requires Network level authentication which your client don't support". How to resolve this??

FINALLY
conclude to use ms RD Client
but with the win10 pc there is an error code of 0x204
 
Last edited:
I just found that using Remote Desktop only one user can be log in at one time, so it is quite limited.
 
Remote access to win10 is denied as the firewall must be set to allow it, so problem is resolved.

In any way RA allow only one user at a time unless we pay to resolve it, hence it is better to use win10 tabloid.
 
As with ALL wi-fi connections, you still have the problem that if you drop the connection, you will potentially shut down your session because your terminal services link suddenly ain't there no more. This would be the same peril for hard-wired connections, granted, but the odds for loss of wi-fi are greater.

If your session aborts because of a lost connection, you have a significant chance of corrupting the database. Further, if you get stuck with that single-user login case and you DON'T crash Access, you have just locked it hard because the rules of TCP/IP say that when you re-establish the connection, because it has a different (negotiated) port number, it is a different connection even from the same source device.

Far be it from me to tell you this can never work, but I DO advise that you are playing very close to a razor's edge from disaster.
 
Thanks grandpa.doc for the advice. I did not fathom fully. What is it that you said i do that will place me next to a chopping edge? :)
 
OK, if you open a remote connection from your terminal that is in front of you to the system that is hosting your application, you use TCP/IP - Transmission Control Protocol & Internet Protocol - for which rules exist regarding those connections.

In the briefest possible summary, you trigger the connection, which causes a behind-the-scenes negotiation between your "network stack" software and the server's "network stack" software. Part of the negotiation is that you not only open a connection to an IP address but also to a specific port number at that address. The port is actually just a generated number that allows you to have more than one connection from your terminal to your destination at the same time, as might happen if you connected through two different windows on the same machine. One might use port number 44129 and the other port would be 44130, for example.

Earlier you said,
In any way RA allow only one user at a time

If you open a session and suddenly the network drops out, you have to reconnect that session - but most systems do not allow a "reconnect" because that is how folks break into systems - through reconnecting dangling connections. So most systems are configured to not allow this. Which means that if you didn't crash the operation when the connection drops (which is significantly possible), then you have a session that you cannot close. Here are the three scenarios that could result from the drop, and the specific perils of each:

1. The dropped session triggers a disconnect event (analogous to a form_close event but with a network connection) that causes a cascade of events to eventually cause your application on the server to terminate abruptly. If it had been in the middle of a partially complete transaction that wasn't protected by a BEGIN/COMMIT sequence, then you wouldn't roll back to a "safe" spot and your database just became inconsistent.

2. The drop occurred but the application dismissed the event and refused to close because it knew it had a partial transaction pending. But... since you cannot reconnect to the dropped connection because of the rules about "reconnect" attempts described above, you can now never finish that transaction because you can't get into that session again to "back it out" or complete the operation.

3. The drop didn't trigger an abort AND your "single-user-at-a-time" case doesn't apply. The database can STILL be locked out for other users because something in the incomplete transaction has a buffer locked and everyone trying to get in gets only so far before they can't access the data in the locked buffer.

In cases 2 and 3, the only way out of that mess is to reboot the server AND THEN do a compact and repair on the database AND THEN (with users still locked out) try to determine if any table contains a partially started transaction that should have been committed because it involved multiple tables. Then you have to back out the parts that should have been protected by a BEGIN/COMMIT style of coding.

That is the chopping edge you are nearing.
 
Thank you, thank you for the long & careful explanation to save my neck. I will dump the idea of RA and stay alive. King Regards.

PS:
Friend, on rereading your last message, are you saying that in all FE & BE connection be with wired or wireless, we must have a BEGIN / END protection, if so, outline example will seal this lesson. :)
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom