User access to Front End of split database

[riggsd]

For a split database, do each of the users have to have a copy of the front end on their desktop or can they all just use the one in the shared folder?

I'm concerned about each user having a copy on their desktop as each time I make a change to the forms, queries, reports, and code, they have to manually replace the file on their desktops.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Joe4]

For a split database, do each of the users have to have a copy of the front end on their desktop or can they all just use the one in the shared folder?

No, they each have their own copy.

I'm concerned about each user having a copy on their desktop as each time I make a change to the forms, queries, reports, and code, they have to manually replace the file on their desktops.

Not a problem, just need to know a few "tricks of the trade". There are a few ways to do this, the following is my favorite.

I create a batch file that does the following:
- Copies a new version of the database down from a location on the network down to their drive
- Opens the database it just copied down to the C drive

Then, I place a shortcut to this batch file on their Desktop. So they use this to run the database.
So every time they run it, it copies down a fresh copy of the front-end to their hard-drive and runs that.
So whenever you have changes to make, you just update the version on the network that gets copied down!

 

[welshgasman]

I use a method that tracks versions within the database.
When it starts, it checks and if it finds a newer version, it shows a warning message, creates a batch file to copy the latest accde, closes the database, copies the file and opens the database.
Once setup, easy to maintain.
I even have a Maintenance menu which holds a version log and amendments, and backs up, front end, backend, and creates the new accde after updating the version number.
The benefit of this method, is that it only copies when needed, not all the time.

Found this on the net, and modified slightly, but 99.9% of the work was done for me.

See post 8 in this thread https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=293847&highlight=update+front

HTH

 

[Joe4]

As you can see, there are various different ways you can go about this, each with advantages or disadvantages.

The benefit of this method, is that it only copies when needed, not all the time.

That can be a good and bad at the same time.
The "advantage" that I find with doing a fresh copy all the time is if they experience some sort of corruption, or accidentally delete (or change) some objects they were supposed to, all they need to do is close it down and re-open it and they get a new copy (so it means they bug me less!).
Of course, the disadvantage is that they will lose any customizations or custom queries that they have created (most off my users aren't that technical, so that really is not an issue for me).

 

[welshgasman]

Joe,
I'm not knocking any method. A lot of people on that forum do the same. I am fortunate that I currently only have a few users and the are also not technically minded, so have managed to get away with my method.

 

[Joe4]

I'm not knocking any method.

I am not either, and I am not knocking your method.
The point I was trying to make as that there are different ways of going about, that have different advantages and disadvantages that depend on their environment and users.
I was simply trying to point out the differences so that they can make the best decision for them, based on their conditions (which we do not have enough knowledge of).

Whereas the method I posted works well for me, it could be very frustrating if they have technical users who like to create and save their own queries!
Its always good to give the users multiple options to choose from!

 

[welshgasman]

Its always good to give the users multiple options to choose from!

Totally agree. There are generally several methods of achieving the same result.