Re: Pros & Cons of sharing a front end MDB (Client workstation vs. Server)
- From: "Rick Brandt" <rickbrandt2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:23:39 GMT
"Max Vit" <mvit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1184551872.780176.4720@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have deployed few Access apps splitting it in Front End and Back
End. Our environment uses Win XP SP2 for clients, Win 2k3 for servers
and Access 2003. The max. number of clients is about 50 (concurrent
users is estimated around 10).
Whilst the Back End always lives on a server, I am not quite clear
where the Front End should live.
I have searched the web and find contradicting views.
Common sense tells me that if I have the Front End in the server then
maintenance should be a breeze because you maintain all your forms,
VBA codes, libraries, options, etc in just one place - but I am not
quite clear about *what* Access features are managed on the server and
*what* are managed (and dependent) on the workstation's install of
Access.
But it *seems* that in a shared environment it is better to have each
client with a copy of the Front End installed at their workstations
because the LDB file that contains the locking information seems to
work better - and this would be high maintenance because there are ~50
clients to maintain.
Is this correct? Will I have less chance of trouble with LDB files if
I have the Front End living on client's workstations as opposed to
having the Front End living on a server and being accessed by multiple
clients?
What would be best practice in a shared environment for a split MDB?
To have the Front End being accessed directly on the server or to
install the Front End on each client's workstation?
In a perfect world the difference would come down to performance and ease of
updates. Individual (local) front ends perform better and a single front end
(might) have some advantages from a version control/update stand-point.
In the real world though we have to add the fact that sharing a single front end
vastly increases the chance of file corruption including corruption of the data
in the back end. This single point means that ALL shared apps should be run
from individual front ends (preferably locally installed).
Beyond that single point is a long list of other advantages that individually
installed front ends has and the fact that the one dubious disadvantage
(updates/version control) is easily solved for individual front ends using any
of a number of auto-update strategies.
--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Pros & Cons of sharing a front end MDB (Client workstation vs. Server)
- Next by Date: Re: Pros & Cons of sharing a front end MDB (Client workstation vs. Server)
- Previous by thread: Pros & Cons of sharing a front end MDB (Client workstation vs. Server)
- Next by thread: Re: Pros & Cons of sharing a front end MDB (Client workstation vs. Server)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
