Many front ends and only one backend

[lread123]

Hello,
I am looking for advise on the following senario:

I have (on a company network) a FrontEnd .accde and a backend .accdb - currently ~ 10 users (some over wifi - slow!)

The FrontEnd is becoming a rather large file ~ 10 MB and is also becoming slower.
I am looking to separate this in to 3 FrontEnd files as to simplify and to lessen the file sizes etc.

My question is - are there any issues around a 3 x FrontEnd databases all connecting to 1 x backend database holding all the tables - over a network?

thank you - and looking forward to any assistance.
Lance.

 

[CJ_London]

Not sure why your front end is growing - once compacted it should hardly change - unless you are creating lots of temporary tables? - If so, move them to a temporary db

Front ends should be installed on your users computers, not on the network but in principle there is no reason why you can't have multiple front ends to the same back end - same principle of MS SQL stc.

I have some examples I have developed where different front ends only link to certain tables in the back end for security/privacy reasons. e.g. admin has full access, sales can only see customer records, finance can only see financial data etc.

 

[lread123]

Hi CJ_London,

Thanks for your response/advise.... very much appreciated.
The front end is growing as the users are demanding more! I have 3 different areas of the business requesting specific changes and so it's growing, it would also be nice to separate for my sanity!
I will put the frontends on to the PC's once the demands slow up and many thanks for confirming this is all OK.
Great idea about the different front ends only linking to certain tables in the back end. never thought of that - just been linking all ! but you're right no need! (der!).

thanks again!

 

[Rx_]

After splitting a db you redistribute the front end to the users. Keep a master copy to make future version changes for re-distribution.

Another alternative is to use Terminal Server or Citrix.
This allows one single copy to be placed on the network server. When a end-user logs in, a copy of the single copy is copied into that user's directory.
Bandwidth is vastly dropped as no actual data goes to the end users workstation. I have had 3 concurrent users logged into one 28.8 modem.
This also makes the Access a Cloud system. Citrix for example can run Access on PC, Mac and others. It also vastly reduces the end-user's PC configuration requirements.

Use this site to find questions on splitting a DB. Then make a plan. It is not that difficult, but a good plan always insures success.

 

[spikepl]

@lread123

Just hold your horses regarding creation of different versions of the front end. It can very quickly evolve into a work-devouring bug-generating nightmare, if you have multiple disparate copies to maintain. Think this through very carefully - begin with the scenario 6 or 12 months down the road. The frond ends can behave differently of course, depending on who is using using them - but all this would be managed by the code, the same code in all front ends.

 

[lread123]

@lread123

Just hold your horses regarding creation of different versions of the front end. It can very quickly evolve into a work-devouring bug-generating nightmare, if you have multiple disparate copies to maintain. Think this through very carefully - begin with the scenario 6 or 12 months down the road. The frond ends can behave differently of course, depending on who is using using them - but all this would be managed by the code, the same code in all front ends.

thanks for this ... I think you're right and I will contain it.
Many of the 'new' requests are now around the form designs and how they suit each area, I want to finalise and then leave well alone! try to!

 

[bob fitz]

I have (on a company network) a FrontEnd .accde and a backend .accdb - currently ~ 10 users (some over wifi - slow!)

Perhaps things have changed in later versions (I'm still using A2003), but I thought that using an Access backend wirelessly was a no no.

 

[lread123]

Perhaps things have changed in later versions (I'm still using A2003), but I thought that using an Access backend wirelessly was a no no.

whys that?

 

[bob fitz]

I thought that data transfer was far less reliable with wireless and that this could/would lead to corruption. I will try to find the earlier posts that I thought I'd read. Using wireless was something that I wanted to implement some years ago, but I thought I was advised against it.

 

[bob fitz]

Take a look at this link, particularly post #4 : http://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=199431

 

[lread123]

Take a look at this link, particularly post #4 : http://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=199431

Ahh well didnt know this - I have been running this for about 6 weeks now with at least 2 people over wifi.
I have seen some crashes, but touch wood, no corruption yet! and the data being in processed at point of crash has been saved successfully.

Thanks for that though - I will request that we hard wire them in ASAP.

 

[Rx_]

In general, I would agree Don't use wireless. It is usually depends on the quality of the wireless. Most places don't prepare for a good wireless system. Here is what worked for me.

At my home office, I have about 5 computers, multiple file servers, smart TV, IP phone system, network laser printers.... Keeping a network cable was a problem.

I converted to the NetGear Powerline Network Adapter. Plug it in the wall AC socket, it has a RJ-45 coming out. Another model plugs in the wall and has a wireless antenna.
It uses the AC power-line to move tcp/ip data between each of the units. Different frequency for parallel paths. An English site claims 1,200 meters. The computer management system is fantastic. It graphically shows data traffic between each plug-in unit.
Back to wireless -if the signal is being brought to a room then re-transmitted in the room rather than across the structure, it seems to work much better. I have been very happy with that. They run around $50 USD per unit. I have one plug-in unit that goes to a splitter to support the network printer, the IP Phone for fax, my tcpip wireless weather stations transmitter, and a wireless transmitter.

I have another wireless transmitter just 25 feet away. The problem was a physical fire-wall with metal reinforcement blocked much of the wireless signal.

My suggestion would be NOT to go with Access over wireless unless you really do your homework on providing a solid wireless signal. That includes monitoring data latency.

It is worth mentioning that each plug-in has a MAC and two level 128 security encryption. Don't want somebody plugging one into the AC powerline and tapping in.
http://www.amazon.com/Netgear-XAVB5001-Powerline-Network-Adapter/dp/B004DVEW8I
Example of the product - but I got a much better deal than Amazon offered.