Linking two databases via a master...??

virgosam20

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 20:52
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
49
Hi,

Last year, many people from this forum were extremely helpful supporting me in setting up a database and now i'm back to see if anyone can possibly help me with development issue I'm having..

The database that I made was extremely successful and has been used on a daily basis since its completion with no complications. The user has now asked me if it is possible to extend it as he has another person wishing to use it also. The problem is, they will be in different locations but the information they input will need to join together as it is to do with ordering products. The user told me they can connect wirelessly to each other via a VPN network, however i'm not sure how stable or successful this type of network is for transferring data.

My question is: Is there any way that a master copy of the database can be set up so that both users can enter data and information that will be updated for both to see?

Any ideas are welcome as I am only just beginning to research into how it might be done..

Thanks,

Sam
 
You might look into using terminal services, Citrix, or a service like logmein.com or gotomypc.com. You can set up a "terminal server" on the local network. It's pretty secure, not as likely to infect your network, and well documented, and thus, supportable.

Otherwise, you'll be looking at putting a web front end on your DB.

I don't recommend connecting to a database over a WAN, though a VPN might work. However, I believe I read in a link provided by Bob that you may not be able to connect directly to an Access backend via wireless. Seems very risky.
 
ooo ok.

so what's the web front?
 
ooo ok.

so what's the web front?

Sorry I wasn't clear. A web front end: writing an entire application in asp, asp.Net, C#.Net, and/or VB.Net that connects to and manipulates your Access database. A very easy thing to mess up and potentially a way to introduce your network to hackers, if done incorrectly. If you have any concerns that your programming staff is not capable of writing an air-tight web application, I wouldn't go this route. And if you're going to go through this much trouble, you might as well put a real live DBMS in at the same time (Oracle or MS SQL Server).

Though I totally hate them, the TS route is really the best in your situation. I regularly use one of the free web-based solutions, even for local access.
 
I don't know if this applies to your wireless setup but I have several computers (and henced linked DB) connected over router by wireless. I have used it up to about 150 feet and that is going through some walls of a double brick house.

I know that forum members give a big tumbs down to using Access over wirelesss and for corruption but I have never had any problems myself and have been using wireless for several years now.

It does drop out at times but that has not caused a problem with the DBs. Although it usually means restarting the router at the least and sometimes rebooting the computers as well.

Of course with these corruption issues there is always the possibility that something has been corrupted but that part of the DB is not being used and so is not noticed. However, I regularly import and I think?? that would detect forms that were corrupted.

Corruption might also depend of what the data base does. 99% of the code in my DB is for Access to Word/Bookmarks and that is only done a few times a week and in 99.9% of cases is done form the base computer. The rest is macro.
 
Thank you. i'll look into these options. I'm sure i'll be back with more questions soon :)
 
You might look at replication. This would allow two separate databases to be synchronised.
 
While replication is an option, Terminal Server is the far preferable option, since it's much easier to set up and maintain.
 
While replication is an option, Terminal Server is the far preferable option, since it's much easier to set up and maintain.
I work with terminal server every day. Reliability is not its strong point! Replication allows individuals to work regardless of the network conditions and can be used on portable devices that amy not always be networked.
 
I work with terminal server every day. Reliability is not its strong point! Replication allows individuals to work regardless of the network conditions and can be used on portable devices that amy not always be networked.

It's not Terminal Server that's unreliable, but the connection. If you have full-time broadband Internet access, then it should work extremely well. Even with dialup, it works quite well.

If you can't have an Internet connection (reliable or not), then, yes, local data is the answer. But that wasn't part of the original scenario.
 
In my experience Terminal Server has it's issues on a WAN, never mind dialup. In theory it's great, in practice, hmm...

It doesn't matter if it is the software that's flakey or it depends on a 100% connection, it's the end result that is the key.
 
Last edited:
Well, our experiences obviously differ. Perhaps my clients maintain higher-quality networks than yours.
 
We have users here that use VPN every day, and the European staff (we are in NJ, USA) also uses VPN when they use the system to produce reports. I have not tried it, but the users say it is just like being on their workstation, except that it is slower. All I know is that to date (and they have done this for several years at least) there has not been any reported problems.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom