Working with remote networks? (1 Viewer)

[Shaftsbury]

We have been using a local access 2000 application for some years now, it is split FE/BE and works well with the small number of users we have on our older network.

I am putting together a proposal to our senior management to upgrade to Access 2007 so that we can take advantage of email and attachments. However we have a few problems with our network that I need to work with, the first being that we have two local networks seperated via a wireless connection.

We have tried splitting the application between the two locations however the network lag makes it impossible to work with.

I have considered creating two seperate applications and having them run at each location, but I'm not sure how easy/practical it would be to share information between them?

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

t we have two local networks seperated via a wireless connection.

As you have discovered access does not like wireless links!

• You could move your backend tables into MS SQL server.
• Alternatively I believe Microsoft Azure might be worth a look, although I have not used it myself.

 

[PNGBill]

We have a similar issue and to avoid the costs involved with SharePoint are going down the track of two Databases that update each other by emailing changes.

Still working on this but believe a feature of access 2010 may assist which is Data Macros.
These are part of each Table and can do an action if there is a change to the table data.
This avoids having to change the code for every activity (could be 1,000's) and still not cater for someone to open a table and enter data.
You just activate the data Macro of each table to kick in.

Sounds good in theory

Just mentioning as if suitable may mean skipping 2007 and go straight to 2010

 

[gemma-the-husky]

i am not sure what you are trying to do exactly, but i am sure A2000 can accommodate everything on your list

eg A2000 can very easily integrate with your outlook application. I am not so sure exactly what attachments implies, though.

The thing is, changing to A2007 (i would go for A2010 personally) may always cause some further problems because of not-quite-compatiblity issues.

 

[Shaftsbury]

Thanks for the replies

We have a HO and a manufacturing plant seperated by about 160km, the database is part of our quality management system tracking non conformance issues.

We need to capture and distribute the data to and from both locations.

I will look in to Azure and see if it will work for us, our IT manager isn't too keen on using Access as a tool but unfortunately it is the only thing I have to work with at the moment without spending a whole lot of money.

 

[jamesmor]

Take a look at either using MySQL or if possible using the free version of MS SQL to show proof of concept and get them to buy.

Access *will* work as a front end for both if you need it to.

 

[tommac]

Why not install Microsoft terminal services server on a new server alongside the one which runs the database back end? In my (limited) experience Access works well like this over ADSL links to the remote clients, as the only data which is passed to the remote clients are screen updates and key presses.

Hope this helps

 

[Simon_MT]

The Terminal Server Solution does involve a Hardware Purchase and perhaps VPN. But after that have the opportunity to distribute mail, documents and databases off the Terminal Server whilst using local printers.

Once on the Terminal Server the data calls are local and therefore little overhead. all that goes across the WAN are essentially screen dumps.

You may even be able to use Witreless off the Terminal Server providing you set a generous Session TimeOut. I have seen users continuing the same session from another PC.

So fas as the database, each user gets a version in their profile pointing to the BE and away you go. There are CAL licensing issues for the Terminal Server, these were inexpensive but MS might have changed its pricing policy to encourage users to use SharePoint.

Simon

 

[gemma-the-husky]

shaftesbury

I already posted, but some futher thoughts on this, in general

before you make proposals to management you need to be 100% sure of exactly what you are trying to achieve, and how it will work, otherwise you are setting yourself up for a lot of pain and recriminations.

you just cannot expect a database to run satisfactorily over anything other than a wired LAN. wireless networks, or WANS may work, but will need testing and careful handling. the problem is that large amounts of data need to be transferred from the data store to the running access program. careful design to reduce the amount of network traffic may help.

as already suggested, a terminal server solution will give good performance, but you need good advice, and the exact architecture will depend on how many users you have. I am not expert in site licensing, and a TS will not be free.

now i dont really see how email fits into this either. but you do not need to update to A2007 to integrate Access with outlook. you do need to understand how your email server works though. eg how do the 2 locations manage emails? eg - do you have separate servers at each end?

and as I mentioned before, none of this needs A2007 necessarily.

 

[Simon_MT]

You can put all your Outlook email on the Terminal Server but I believe not the Exchange Server.

It is quite an efficient way to deal with information issues.

Being in a 'server' environment it is fairly robust and reliable providing there is a back-up strategy. With a Raid configuration there is only a problem if two drives go, one drive can be hot swapped and rebuilt using checksums.

Simon