Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

C: Drive

Discussion in 'Information Technology' started by Howard, Jul 28, 2006.

Tags:
  1. Howard

    Howard
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Our database is split front-end/back-end. We're migrating to Windows XP from
    Windows 2000, although we're keeping Access 2000. The IT installer says we
    can have the front-end on the U: drive, which is our personal drive on the
    network, rather than the C: drive. I thought the idea of splitting the
    database was that only the data on the back-end would run over the network
    (T: drive, our share drive). Shouldn't the front-end be on the users C: drive?

    Prior to splitting the database, we had lock-up problems, etc. I don't want
    those problems again.

    Thanks,
    --
    Howard
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Allen Browne

    Allen Browne
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Re: Drive

    If you can use the local hard disk it will reduce the amount of network
    traffic.

    If you cannot, you can get away with your own personal space on a network
    drive. Since each user has a completely difference mdb file they are
    opening, you still have the isolation you need.

    --
    Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
    Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
    Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

    "Howard" <DFM@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:F891261E-00CD-4428-A3EB-68F98B9614E1@microsoft.com...
    > Our database is split front-end/back-end. We're migrating to Windows XP
    > from
    > Windows 2000, although we're keeping Access 2000. The IT installer says
    > we
    > can have the front-end on the U: drive, which is our personal drive on the
    > network, rather than the C: drive. I thought the idea of splitting the
    > database was that only the data on the back-end would run over the network
    > (T: drive, our share drive). Shouldn't the front-end be on the users C:
    > drive?
    >
    > Prior to splitting the database, we had lock-up problems, etc. I don't
    > want
    > those problems again.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > --
    > Howard
     
  4. Dirk Goldgar

    Dirk Goldgar
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Re: Drive

    "Howard" <DFM@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:F891261E-00CD-4428-A3EB-68F98B9614E1@microsoft.com
    > Our database is split front-end/back-end. We're migrating to Windows
    > XP from Windows 2000, although we're keeping Access 2000. The IT
    > installer says we can have the front-end on the U: drive, which is
    > our personal drive on the network, rather than the C: drive. I
    > thought the idea of splitting the database was that only the data on
    > the back-end would run over the network (T: drive, our share drive).
    > Shouldn't the front-end be on the users C: drive?
    >
    > Prior to splitting the database, we had lock-up problems, etc. I
    > don't want those problems again.


    Having the front-end on the U: drive (personal, but on network) would
    solve your lock-out problems, but will still be less efficient and
    somewhat corruption-prone (because design elements have to be sent
    across the network). At least your corruptions of the front-end would
    only affect you, and it could easily be restored from a master copy.

    I recommend putting the front-end on a local drive, such as the C:
    drive.

    --
    Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP
    www.datagnostics.com

    (please reply to the newsgroup)
     
  5. Howard

    Howard
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Re: Drive

    Thanks to both of you for your replies.
    --
    Howard


    "Dirk Goldgar" wrote:

    > "Howard" <DFM@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:F891261E-00CD-4428-A3EB-68F98B9614E1@microsoft.com
    > > Our database is split front-end/back-end. We're migrating to Windows
    > > XP from Windows 2000, although we're keeping Access 2000. The IT
    > > installer says we can have the front-end on the U: drive, which is
    > > our personal drive on the network, rather than the C: drive. I
    > > thought the idea of splitting the database was that only the data on
    > > the back-end would run over the network (T: drive, our share drive).
    > > Shouldn't the front-end be on the users C: drive?
    > >
    > > Prior to splitting the database, we had lock-up problems, etc. I
    > > don't want those problems again.

    >
    > Having the front-end on the U: drive (personal, but on network) would
    > solve your lock-out problems, but will still be less efficient and
    > somewhat corruption-prone (because design elements have to be sent
    > across the network). At least your corruptions of the front-end would
    > only affect you, and it could easily be restored from a master copy.
    >
    > I recommend putting the front-end on a local drive, such as the C:
    > drive.
    >
    > --
    > Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP
    > www.datagnostics.com
    >
    > (please reply to the newsgroup)
    >
    >
    >
     
  6. Sarah Schreffler

    Sarah Schreffler
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Howard wrote:
    > Our database is split front-end/back-end. We're migrating to Windows XP from
    > Windows 2000, although we're keeping Access 2000. The IT installer says we
    > can have the front-end on the U: drive, which is our personal drive on the
    > network, rather than the C: drive. I thought the idea of splitting the
    > database was that only the data on the back-end would run over the network
    > (T: drive, our share drive). Shouldn't the front-end be on the users C: drive?
    >
    > Prior to splitting the database, we had lock-up problems, etc. I don't want
    > those problems again.


    Sarah:
    Talk to your IT department about why they want it on the U: drive -- it
    is likely it has to do with being able to backup the database. They
    can not be sure that the C: drive is backed up, but the U: drive they
    can.
     
  7. SusanV

    SusanV
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    In which case, assure them that you will push a copy of the frontend (and if
    distributing an MDE, also the uncompiled frontend dev mdb) to a location of
    their choosing for backup purposes.

    ;-)

    SusanV

    "Sarah Schreffler" <sarah.schreffler@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1149869087.174879.300610@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    > Howard wrote:
    >> Our database is split front-end/back-end. We're migrating to Windows XP
    >> from
    >> Windows 2000, although we're keeping Access 2000. The IT installer says
    >> we
    >> can have the front-end on the U: drive, which is our personal drive on
    >> the
    >> network, rather than the C: drive. I thought the idea of splitting the
    >> database was that only the data on the back-end would run over the
    >> network
    >> (T: drive, our share drive). Shouldn't the front-end be on the users C:
    >> drive?
    >>
    >> Prior to splitting the database, we had lock-up problems, etc. I don't
    >> want
    >> those problems again.

    >
    > Sarah:
    > Talk to your IT department about why they want it on the U: drive -- it
    > is likely it has to do with being able to backup the database. They
    > can not be sure that the C: drive is backed up, but the U: drive they
    > can.
    >
     
  8. Dirk Goldgar

    Dirk Goldgar
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    "Sarah Schreffler" <sarah.schreffler@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1149869087.174879.300610@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
    >
    > Talk to your IT department about why they want it on the U: drive --
    > it is likely it has to do with being able to backup the database.
    > They can not be sure that the C: drive is backed up, but the U: drive
    > they can.


    Good point, but in most split applications the front-end contains
    nothing that really needs to be preserved, so long as the master copy
    can readily be retrieved and reinstalled. It's different if
    user-specific data, or user-designed, personal queries, are stored in
    the front-end.


    --
    Dirk Goldgar, MS Access MVP
    www.datagnostics.com

    (please reply to the newsgroup)
     

Share This Page