accessing using different Access versions

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Kevin - 30 Sep 2005 06:59 GMT

I don't know if this is relevant to this thread, but is there a
practical approach to allowing users with Access versions 97 through
2003 to use the same database? Is this splitting the back-end from the
front-end a viable approach?

Reply to this Message

Brendan Reynolds - 30 Sep 2005 10:54 GMT

Split the back-end from the front-end, keep the back-end in Access 97 (Jet
3.51) format, do your development work using Access 97, convert a copy of
the front-end to Access 2000 for the users who are using later versions of
Access. This converted copy should work with versions of Access from 2000
through 2003, inclusive, though there may be some changes in behaviour that
might require minor modifications. I can't recommend developing in a later
version and converting back to Access 97 - you may get away with it, but I
can not recommend it.

Signature

Brendan Reynolds (MVP)

>I don't know if this is relevant to this thread, but is there a
> practical approach to allowing users with Access versions 97 through
> 2003 to use the same database? Is this splitting the back-end from the
> front-end a viable approach?

Reply to this Message

Kevin - 30 Sep 2005 16:46 GMT

> Split the back-end from the front-end, keep the back-end in Access 97
> (Jet 3.51) format, do your development work using Access 97, convert
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> converting back to Access 97 - you may get away with it, but I can
> not recommend it.

Thank you. Can you point me to a detailed discussion/description of how
to split BE from FE?

Reply to this Message

Rick Brandt - 30 Sep 2005 20:12 GMT

>> Split the back-end from the front-end, keep the back-end in Access 97
>> (Jet 3.51) format, do your development work using Access 97, convert
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Thank you. Can you point me to a detailed discussion/description of
> how to split BE from FE?

Copy the file naming the new copy whatever name you want to use for the back
end. In the back end file delete all objects except the tables, then move
it to the desired location on the network.

In your front end file delete all the tables. Then use "File - Get External
Data - Link Tables" to create links to all of the tables in the back end
file. Navigate to the back end file through "Network Neighborhood - Entire
Network" so that your links end up using a UNC path
(\\ServerName\ShareName\) instead of a mapped drive letter. That will
ensure that it works the same for all users on your LAN.

All users will need FULL permissions to the folder where you place the back
end.

Signature

I don't check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com

Reply to this Message

Bob M - 30 Sep 2005 21:00 GMT

Helpful Hint:I usually name my backends using _be eg. if the frontend on each
computer is Cusomers.mdb, the backend on the server is Customers_be.mdb. It
makes it a lot easier to determine what goes with what.

>>> Split the back-end from the front-end, keep the back-end in Access 97
>>> (Jet 3.51) format, do your development work using Access 97, convert
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>All users will need FULL permissions to the folder where you place the back
>end.

Reply to this Message

Rob G - 04 Oct 2005 15:56 GMT

This thread is one of the most useful and straight forward problems and
responses I have ever seen on a newsgroup. Great job everyone.

> Helpful Hint:I usually name my backends using _be eg. if the frontend on each
> computer is Cusomers.mdb, the backend on the server is Customers_be.mdb. It
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> >All users will need FULL permissions to the folder where you place the back
> >end.

Reply to this Message

Bob M - 06 Oct 2005 21:32 GMT

I would recommend that you don't give all users Full control. Keep this for
you and a backup person. Give the users Modify rights. Full control should
be for the db manager(s) only. The manager(s) are the only ones who should
be assigning security to users and that's what Full allows.

Reply to this Message