Use Map drive for back end or not?

[THANX LW]

Hi there,
I am ready to try split database for the first time for multiple users
enviroment. I have few questions about split database.
1. I have heard and read that mapped drive is not a good idea to place a
backend. but in my case where all the users will be using one mapped drive I
dont see reason why not to use mapped drive.

2. if I split a database then what is the best way to do updates on front
end. so i dont have to replace all .mde files for each client.if I have Front
end on each client's machine then how is that possible.

3. finally is it a good idea to split a database which users are already
using for some time now. will that effect the database in any way.

Thank in advance.

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

1) If all your users have the same mapped drive, I don't see any reason not
to use mapped drives either.

2) Take a look at the free Auto FE Updater Tony Toews has at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/autofe.htm

3) Having a split database is an extremely good idea. Having multiple users
all using the same database increases the risk of corruption significantly.
Assuming you split the database when no one's in it, it should be completely
transparent to the users.

 

[Rick Brandt]

Hi there,
I am ready to try split database for the first time for multiple users
enviroment. I have few questions about split database.
1. I have heard and read that mapped drive is not a good idea to
place a backend. but in my case where all the users will be using one
mapped drive I dont see reason why not to use mapped drive. [snip]

But do you have a reason FOR using a mapped drive? Using a UNC path takes
what, a few extra seconds to do and then you're done and don't have to worry
about that one lone user who doesn't have the same mapped drive

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

Hi there,
I am ready to try split database for the first time for multiple users
enviroment. I have few questions about split database.
1. I have heard and read that mapped drive is not a good idea to
place a backend. but in my case where all the users will be using one
mapped drive I dont see reason why not to use mapped drive. [snip]

But do you have a reason FOR using a mapped drive? Using a UNC path takes
what, a few extra seconds to do and then you're done and don't have to
worry about that one lone user who doesn't have the same mapped drive

While you're correct, Rick, there are situations where it does make sense to
use a mapped drive.

We're a multinational corporation, with about 100,000 desktops world-wide.
All users automatically get their drives mapped, with the actual servers to
use detected through the logon script. "Corporate" data is stored on the I:
drive, therefore when we package an Access application, the frontend always
points to the I: drive. For one division, that I: drive could be in Toronto,
for another group, in Houston. However, since the application always looks
to the I: drive, no remapping is required. If a UNC was used, it simply
wouldn't work for us.

It's also simple for developers to work on their applications: simply remap
your I: drive, and you're pointing to the test or development versions of
the database, so that you don't mess with production data.

 

[THANX LW]

Thanks Dougles and Rick for your advice that made my decision lot easier.

Rick the only reason i was intrested in using a map drive because I am not
part of IT department where i work and thats why dont have access to server
directly but i have couple of mapped drives where i have full control to add
or remove any users I want. I have different databases and I assign Seperate
mapped drive to each group of users.
I wanted to know does map drive effect the performance of database in any way?

Hi there,
I am ready to try split database for the first time for multiple users
enviroment. I have few questions about split database.
1. I have heard and read that mapped drive is not a good idea to
place a backend. but in my case where all the users will be using one
mapped drive I dont see reason why not to use mapped drive. [snip]

But do you have a reason FOR using a mapped drive? Using a UNC path takes
what, a few extra seconds to do and then you're done and don't have to worry
about that one lone user who doesn't have the same mapped drive

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

Using mapped drivers shouldn't have any effect on performance. However, your
comments don't really make any sense!

There's no such thing as "mapped drives where i have full control to add or
remove any users I want": users get access to the folders on the server
(and/or to the share itself), not the mapped drive.

You don't need any special access to the server to use UNCs. You're mapping,
say, your E: drive to \\server1\share and then using E:\Folder\file.mdb. To
use UNCs, you simply use \\server1\share\folder\file.mdb

--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP

(no e-mails, please!)

Thanks Dougles and Rick for your advice that made my decision lot easier.

Rick the only reason i was intrested in using a map drive because I am not
part of IT department where i work and thats why dont have access to
server
directly but i have couple of mapped drives where i have full control to
add
or remove any users I want. I have different databases and I assign
Seperate
mapped drive to each group of users.
I wanted to know does map drive effect the performance of database in any
way?

Hi there,
I am ready to try split database for the first time for multiple users
enviroment. I have few questions about split database.
1. I have heard and read that mapped drive is not a good idea to
place a backend. but in my case where all the users will be using one
mapped drive I dont see reason why not to use mapped drive. [snip]

But do you have a reason FOR using a mapped drive? Using a UNC path
takes
what, a few extra seconds to do and then you're done and don't have to
worry
about that one lone user who doesn't have the same mapped drive