Network Drive Not Being Added To Trusted Location

[Faraz Ahmed Qureshi]

I have an access database on a network drive which I want 2 be accessible to
all the official users. However, after designing the moment I have placed it
on a Network drive I have found it not to be added to trusted locations for
the VBA code 2 b working.

Any particular reason? and way out?

 

[Gina Whipp]

Faraz,

The database should be split and front ends placed on the Users local drive.
That is what should be added to the Trusted Location. I have never added a
network drive to the Trusted Location and never found it necessary to do so.
Your Users should only need Read, Write and Delete to the folder the backend
is located in in. (Though I think there is some debate about Delete
privileges, I do give it to them.)

--
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

message I have an access database on a network drive which I want 2 be accessible to
all the official users. However, after designing the moment I have placed it
on a Network drive I have found it not to be added to trusted locations for
the VBA code 2 b working.

Any particular reason? and way out?

 

[Faraz Ahmed Qureshi]

Thanx Gina,

However, never have had an experience of a split database. Any good
reference/source?

 

[Gina Whipp]

Faraz,

Here you go...

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/split/

http://allenbrowne.com/ser-01.html


You may also want to take a look at MVP Tom Wickerath's article...

http://www.accessmvp.com:80/TWickerath/articles/multiuser.htm


To handle the update of multiple front ends see...

http://www.autofeupdater.com/


If each user needs Access you can install the Runtime...

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...d9-9dc6-4b38-9fa6-2c745a175aed&displaylang=en

--
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

message Thanx Gina,

However, never have had an experience of a split database. Any good
reference/source?

 

[Faraz Ahmed Qureshi]

Thanx Gina!
U R simply the best!!!

 

[Gina Whipp]

WOW! Thank you!

--
Gina Whipp
2010 Microsoft MVP (Access)

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

message Thanx Gina!
U R simply the best!!!

 

[andyuse]

Gina,
Apologies for being a little unsure of your comments. We have an Access 2007 app being developed, it is ready for its first deployement onto a Windows Server for use by a group of users all using Windows PCs.
You are saying we should put the FE on the local machines and the BE on the network server, however that causes difficulties in upgrading the app when we release the next version. Each PC will need to be visited and the app file replaced.
The thought of having the FE on the network share was so we only need to upgrade in one place and the next time the users run the access app, they get the latest version.
If MS Access cannot trust a MS server network drive then this introduces overhead and possible issues with the upgrade process of our app.

Any thoughts you have on the above (like how do we stop old access apps running on the new DB when logic has changed) will be appreciated.
THanks, Andy

 

[John W. Vinson]

Each PC will need to be visited and the app file replaced.

Exactly. That's easily automated; see Tony Toews' auto frontend updater:

http://autofeupdater.com/

The thought of having the FE on the network share was so we only need to upgrade in one place and the next time the users run the access app, they get the latest version.

Sharing a single frontend in a split database gives you the WORST combination.
It has all the disadvantages of a shared unitary database (user contention,
bloat, risk of corruption) *and* of a split database.