Diver512 said:
John,
This info is very useful, seeing as the Help Desk here was worthless. They
said it is definitely the versions causing the problem. Anyway, to answer
some of your questions:
The 3 subprojects, along with the Resource Pool had no problems opening.
Only the master project had problems.
People are not supposed to be removing the files at all from the shared
drive, but it is possible that it could happen. Moving forward we plan to
create an archive folder on the shared drive to save all previous versions by
date.
After looking at the master project, there are some links on summary lines.
Most if not all are successor links.
There were no glitches on anyone's computers when accessing the plans.
As far as Relationship circles goes, I am not sure at this time on how to
even check if that is a problem. I can understand how it can cause a
problem, but do not know how to find that out.
They are contemplating combining all of the projects onto one project, which
I highly suggested against. I am just hoping we can solve this problem
before it gets to that. Thank you for your time and I look forward to
hearing what you think about this added information.
Thanks,
Brian
Brian,
I didn't say that using various versions of Project was NOT relevant to
the problem, but I would look in other areas first. For example, if you
have links on summary lines, they need to removed. This is the one
single most prevalent reason for circular relationships and those can
lead to corruption. You might want to go to our MVP website at:
http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm and take a look at FAQ 48 - Summary
Task Linking.
Once the summary line linking issue is resolved then you will be able to
tell if circular relationships still exist. And you might also just be
able to re-build the master and be on your way.
With respect to converting the dynamic master with separate subprojects,
there are pros and cons. The big advantage of a dynamically linked
structure is that projects are kept to a more manageable level and each
project owner basically deals with their own project without having to
wade through a large file. The disadvantage of a master with subprojects
is that the inherent linking structure is subject to corruption and
therefore working with a dynamic structure requires a lot of file
management discipline. The main advantage of a single file is that there
is no linking structure to worry about - it's all in one big "happy"
file. The disadvantage of a single file is that multiple concurrent user
access is not possible and of course the file is much larger.
So what's my preference? I favor the linked structure. It's a good
approach for multiple project owners and given a good set of corporate
groundrules for users, there should be little chance of problems.
However, for your reference, if you elect to go with a single file
structure and those files have links between subprojects, I have a macro
that will do the conversion. It is not freeware, but if you are
interested, let me know.
John
Project MVP
Project MVP