 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
MS Access Forum / Multiuser / Networking / August 2007Access on a wireless network
Hi, I've created a database to monitor machine downtime. The database has been split and the front end will be installed on the C drive on seven machines. The back end of the database will be stored on a server and will be accessed through a wireless network. I think I read somewhere that Access doesnt work very well on wireless networks. Will the database function properly? It is due to be rolled out next week, this is the first consideration ive given to the network. Thanks for the help Tommy It is very risky....and I expaly "why" currupton ocicres in the follwing article: http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal//Wan/Wans.html  SignatureAlbert D. Kallal (Access MVP) Edmonton, Alberta Canada pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com Im pretty new to Access so hadnt thought about anything like that, I'm not a systmes developer or IT person, I'm an engineer. The databaseI've created is part of a process improvement. The whole company operates through a wireless network. What would be the best thing I could do to ensure I get the best possible performance from the database? Thanks for the help Tommy > It is very risky....and I expaly "why" currupton ocicres in the follwing > article: > > http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal//Wan/Wans.html > Im pretty new to Access so hadnt thought about anything like that, > I'm not a systmes developer or IT person, I'm an engineer. The > databaseI've created is part of a process improvement. The whole > company operates through a wireless network. What would be the > best thing I could do to ensure I get the best possible > performance from the database? Terminal Server? SignatureDavid W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/ usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/ Not really sure what you mean by a terminal server. The way the network iin the company is setup, the backend of the database will go onto one of the networked drives, which will be accessed through a wireless network. Will I have to upgrade to some sort of client/server database or will the standard access database be ok. the database will be used by 11 people altogether, 7 operators inputing data and four users getting reports from data. > > Im pretty new to Access so hadnt thought about anything like that, > > I'm not a systmes developer or IT person, I'm an engineer. The [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Terminal Server? Changing the back-end to a different source does nothing for the issues Albert mentioned about connecting using "wireless"... Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP > Not really sure what you mean by a terminal server. The way the network > iin [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> >> Terminal Server? > Changing the back-end to a different source does nothing for the > issues Albert mentioned about connecting using "wireless"... It doesn't? I thought changing to SQL Server was one of the most-often recommended solutions for pepole operating on unreliable networks. SignatureDavid W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/ usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/ Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. If the back-end is robust (e.g., SQL-Server), how does that affect the quality of the network connecting the front-ends to the back-ends? Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Office/Access MVP >> Changing the back-end to a different source does nothing for the >> issues Albert mentioned about connecting using "wireless"... > > It doesn't? I thought changing to SQL Server was one of the > most-often recommended solutions for pepole operating on unreliable > networks. > Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. > > If the back-end is robust (e.g., SQL-Server), how does that affect the > quality of the network connecting the front-ends to the back-ends? It doesn't. But, when you are working with a file-server... that is, all the word done on the user machine, with the data residing on a server, any interruption in connection can leave you with pointers and values set in the back-end (more to the point, after the interruption, when you start over, they will be _wrongly_ set, as though an operation were still in progress). That is, your database will be corrupted (usually, but not always, fixable with Compact and Repair). With a server, you are essentially sending a request, which will be processed on the server, and then the result will be sent back... if the user's machine is not connected, no damage is done on the server because the database transaction was complete server-side, it's just that the user's software was not available or able to receive and acknowledge and do something with it. Larry Linson Larry Thanks, Larry. That scenario makes sense... Jeff >> Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Larry > Not really sure what you mean by a terminal server. The way the > network iin the company is setup, the backend of the database will [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ok. the database will be used by 11 people altogether, 7 > operators inputing data and four users getting reports from data. Windows Terminal Server. It's a remote desktop to a shared server, where the app runs in the memory of the server. One Windows server can easily support that user population. And it makes maintenance *very* easy, as everything is one server, and a server that can easily be administered remotely (via remote desktop). SignatureDavid W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/ usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.