Welcome to SPN

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

Sign Up Now!

Sharing database over VPN - Replication or FE/BE? both?

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

  1. AJ

    AJ
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    My office needs to share our database with another office over a VPN, which I
    know that without replicating or splitting the database won't work. How do I
    know which one to choose?

    Here is the situtation. I have one database in my office that 5 people use
    at the same time. It has two linked tables from another office. Currently it
    is not split.

    We now have a "satelite" office on the other side of town and they need to
    have access to the database too in order to update their information.

    I have tried splitting a test database, but it simply won't run on their
    side. (It takes about an hour to open)
    I have tried replicating, but this won't work because I have a linked table
    that the database pulls from. I know that I cannot relink the info on their
    side and if I change the link in the master, then it changes it for our side
    too.

    What is the best solution? I am currently trying to get them to upgrade to a
    T1 line instead of DSL, which, I believe would solve all of our problems. (I
    could then split the database and be done)
     
  2. Loading...

    Similar Threads Forum Date
    Sikhi VAND CHHAKNA: The Sikh Way Of Sharing & Caring Sikh Sikhi Sikhism Dec 3, 2015
    Sharing A Bit About My Journey Into Sikhi New to Sikhism Aug 30, 2014
    India Sounding the alarm on wife-sharing Breaking News Nov 10, 2011
    India "Wife-sharing" haunts Indian villages as girls decline Breaking News Oct 28, 2011
    Legal Sharing Passwords with Spouse is Risky Breaking News Oct 14, 2011

  3. Rick Brandt

    Rick Brandt
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    AJ wrote:
    > My office needs to share our database with another office over a VPN,
    > which I know that without replicating or splitting the database won't
    > work. How do I know which one to choose?
    >
    > Here is the situtation. I have one database in my office that 5
    > people use at the same time. It has two linked tables from another
    > office. Currently it is not split.
    >
    > We now have a "satelite" office on the other side of town and they
    > need to have access to the database too in order to update their
    > information.
    >
    > I have tried splitting a test database, but it simply won't run on
    > their side. (It takes about an hour to open)
    > I have tried replicating, but this won't work because I have a linked
    > table that the database pulls from. I know that I cannot relink the
    > info on their side and if I change the link in the master, then it
    > changes it for our side too.
    >
    > What is the best solution? I am currently trying to get them to
    > upgrade to a T1 line instead of DSL, which, I believe would solve all
    > of our problems. (I could then split the database and be done)


    Use Terminal Services so that they can remotely run the app on your LAN but
    get screen updates over the VPN. No matter how fast their connection is a
    standard split setup will not work acceptable or reliably. The best WAN
    connections are still not as good as a really slow LAN.


    --
    Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
    Email (as appropriate) to...
    RBrandt at Hunter dot com
     
  4. Douglas J. Steele

    Douglas J. Steele
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Replicating and splitting aren't mutually exclusive!

    All databases should be split into a front-end (containing the queries,
    forms, reports, macros and modules), linked to a back-end (containing the
    tables and relationships). The back-end can also be replicated if you want
    (replication should only be used for data, never application components such
    as are contained in the front-end)

    However, neither is really the answer in your case (and no, upgrading to a
    T1 isn't the answer either). You might want to read what Albert Kallal has
    to say about using Access over a WAN at
    http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Wan/Wans.html


    --
    Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP
    http://I.Am/DougSteele
    (no private e-mails, please)


    "AJ" <AJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C1B263AA-83B6-4796-BF57-5149DAD34423@microsoft.com...
    > My office needs to share our database with another office over a VPN,
    > which I
    > know that without replicating or splitting the database won't work. How do
    > I
    > know which one to choose?
    >
    > Here is the situtation. I have one database in my office that 5 people use
    > at the same time. It has two linked tables from another office. Currently
    > it
    > is not split.
    >
    > We now have a "satelite" office on the other side of town and they need to
    > have access to the database too in order to update their information.
    >
    > I have tried splitting a test database, but it simply won't run on their
    > side. (It takes about an hour to open)
    > I have tried replicating, but this won't work because I have a linked
    > table
    > that the database pulls from. I know that I cannot relink the info on
    > their
    > side and if I change the link in the master, then it changes it for our
    > side
    > too.
    >
    > What is the best solution? I am currently trying to get them to upgrade to
    > a
    > T1 line instead of DSL, which, I believe would solve all of our problems.
    > (I
    > could then split the database and be done)
     
  5. AJ

    AJ
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Thanks, I have already read that article. But I don't see that converting the
    database to TS or anything else is a solution for me either...our office
    locks that kind of stuff down and only the IT department would be able to do
    it (and believe me, they have no idea about what to do with access). Not to
    mention I have no idea how.

    Isn't there a simpler solution that would do, maybe not optimum, but that
    would work for now? I only have six users.

    Thanks again.

    "Douglas J. Steele" wrote:

    > Replicating and splitting aren't mutually exclusive!
    >
    > All databases should be split into a front-end (containing the queries,
    > forms, reports, macros and modules), linked to a back-end (containing the
    > tables and relationships). The back-end can also be replicated if you want
    > (replication should only be used for data, never application components such
    > as are contained in the front-end)
    >
    > However, neither is really the answer in your case (and no, upgrading to a
    > T1 isn't the answer either). You might want to read what Albert Kallal has
    > to say about using Access over a WAN at
    > http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Wan/Wans.html
    >
    >
    > --
    > Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP
    > http://I.Am/DougSteele
    > (no private e-mails, please)
    >
    >
    > "AJ" <AJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:C1B263AA-83B6-4796-BF57-5149DAD34423@microsoft.com...
    > > My office needs to share our database with another office over a VPN,
    > > which I
    > > know that without replicating or splitting the database won't work. How do
    > > I
    > > know which one to choose?
    > >
    > > Here is the situtation. I have one database in my office that 5 people use
    > > at the same time. It has two linked tables from another office. Currently
    > > it
    > > is not split.
    > >
    > > We now have a "satelite" office on the other side of town and they need to
    > > have access to the database too in order to update their information.
    > >
    > > I have tried splitting a test database, but it simply won't run on their
    > > side. (It takes about an hour to open)
    > > I have tried replicating, but this won't work because I have a linked
    > > table
    > > that the database pulls from. I know that I cannot relink the info on
    > > their
    > > side and if I change the link in the master, then it changes it for our
    > > side
    > > too.
    > >
    > > What is the best solution? I am currently trying to get them to upgrade to
    > > a
    > > T1 line instead of DSL, which, I believe would solve all of our problems.
    > > (I
    > > could then split the database and be done)

    >
    >
    >
     
  6. Rick Brandt

    Rick Brandt
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    AJ wrote:
    > Thanks, I have already read that article. But I don't see that
    > converting the database to TS or anything else is a solution for me
    > either...our office locks that kind of stuff down and only the IT
    > department would be able to do it (and believe me, they have no idea
    > about what to do with access). Not to mention I have no idea how.
    >
    > Isn't there a simpler solution that would do, maybe not optimum, but
    > that would work for now? I only have six users.


    You have to understand that you are asking for a way for a *file* to be
    opened and shared over a DSL line where the application is updating "pieces"
    of the file constantly while in use. A WAN connection is just not reliable
    enough for that. You were only noticing how poor the performance was. The
    bigger problem is that the file is almost certain to be corrupted by trying
    to use it this way.

    If you moved the data to a server database like MSDE or SQL Server then
    "acceptable, but still poor" performance can be achieved and the corruption
    issue goes away.

    --
    Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
    Email (as appropriate) to...
    RBrandt at Hunter dot com
     
  7. Immanuel Sibero

    Immanuel Sibero
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    AJ,

    > locks that kind of stuff down and only the IT department would be able to

    do
    > it (and believe me, they have no idea about what to do with access).


    Setting up Access to run with TS is not really an Access specific task, it
    is a general IT task. You can set up any end user application (i.e. not just
    Access) to run with TS. Are you telling me that you have an IT dept that's
    sophisticated enough to lock things down but not able to realize that
    running Access under TS is a legitimate need of the users?

    > .. (and believe me, they have no idea about what to do with access).


    I run an IT dept and we are very familiar with every software that the users
    run and that includes Access. Implementation of TS is very common and not
    just for Access. The idea that an IT dept doesnt know users are running a
    particular application (i.e. Access) on the network appalling. What do they
    do all day? Isn't the IT dept set up to support/facilitate users? Not the
    other way around?


    Immanuel Sibero



    "AJ" <AJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:5ECE90CD-B6C6-409A-8317-AB5D066DFCF2@microsoft.com...
    > Thanks, I have already read that article. But I don't see that converting

    the
    > database to TS or anything else is a solution for me either...our office
    > locks that kind of stuff down and only the IT department would be able to

    do
    > it (and believe me, they have no idea about what to do with access). Not

    to
    > mention I have no idea how.
    >
    > Isn't there a simpler solution that would do, maybe not optimum, but that
    > would work for now? I only have six users.
    >
    > Thanks again.
    >
    > "Douglas J. Steele" wrote:
    >
    > > Replicating and splitting aren't mutually exclusive!
    > >
    > > All databases should be split into a front-end (containing the queries,
    > > forms, reports, macros and modules), linked to a back-end (containing

    the
    > > tables and relationships). The back-end can also be replicated if you

    want
    > > (replication should only be used for data, never application components

    such
    > > as are contained in the front-end)
    > >
    > > However, neither is really the answer in your case (and no, upgrading to

    a
    > > T1 isn't the answer either). You might want to read what Albert Kallal

    has
    > > to say about using Access over a WAN at
    > > http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Wan/Wans.html
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP
    > > http://I.Am/DougSteele
    > > (no private e-mails, please)
    > >
    > >
    > > "AJ" <AJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > > news:C1B263AA-83B6-4796-BF57-5149DAD34423@microsoft.com...
    > > > My office needs to share our database with another office over a VPN,
    > > > which I
    > > > know that without replicating or splitting the database won't work.

    How do
    > > > I
    > > > know which one to choose?
    > > >
    > > > Here is the situtation. I have one database in my office that 5 people

    use
    > > > at the same time. It has two linked tables from another office.

    Currently
    > > > it
    > > > is not split.
    > > >
    > > > We now have a "satelite" office on the other side of town and they

    need to
    > > > have access to the database too in order to update their information.
    > > >
    > > > I have tried splitting a test database, but it simply won't run on

    their
    > > > side. (It takes about an hour to open)
    > > > I have tried replicating, but this won't work because I have a linked
    > > > table
    > > > that the database pulls from. I know that I cannot relink the info on
    > > > their
    > > > side and if I change the link in the master, then it changes it for

    our
    > > > side
    > > > too.
    > > >
    > > > What is the best solution? I am currently trying to get them to

    upgrade to
    > > > a
    > > > T1 line instead of DSL, which, I believe would solve all of our

    problems.
    > > > (I
    > > > could then split the database and be done)

    > >
    > >
    > >
     
  8. Albert D.Kallal

    Albert D.Kallal
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    "AJ" <AJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:5ECE90CD-B6C6-409A-8317-AB5D066DFCF2@microsoft.com...
    > Thanks, I have already read that article. But I don't see that converting
    > the
    > database to TS


    The above approach requites zero changes to the ms-access application. It is
    a remote desktop technology and NO changes need be made to the existing
    ms-access application.

    If you are looking for a cure-all solution that does not requite you to
    change the current ms-access database, then TS is your ticket of choice....

    --
    Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada
    pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com
    http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal
     

Share This Page