Help needed !! multiple f-e and single b-e

[crash009]

Hi Everyone !



I have prepared an access database that is supposed to be shared on a local network. I have split the database and now I just have to copy the f-e and distribute it to all users.

Unfortunately there is one thing that i can't figure out: I would like to have many types of front-end files (each of them has a different content) and the back end file will be the combination of all these front end files' content.

Is that even possible? If yes, how?

Many thanks in advance for your help.

Cheers !

[June7]

Sorry, does not make any sense to me. Frontend should not have tables that are intended to store shared data.

The only thing I can think of that comes close to what you describe is a database I had to design. There is a single file retained in the main office as a central repository. Empty copies of the db are distributed to each project site office. At end of construction season the files are returned and records are imported to the central file.

[crash009]

Sorry I think i did not explain my point so well. Frontend is not supposed to have tables that are intended to store shared data. The shared data will be stored in the backend.

The point is to have a separate file for each user. There will be a different content for each front end database.

The back end will be the combination of all the front end files' content...

Thanks again

[June7]

Sorry, still doesn't make sense. What is the different content? If the FE doesn't have data intended to be shared then why would the BE combine the various contents? Sounds to me like what is needed is a frontend that filters records on forms and reports for each user.

The scenario I described earlier was chosen because site offices often did not have reliable internet.

[dunc723]

Sounds like Crash wants different users to have different interfaces - maybe different input forms for different purposes (order entry vs. shipping, for example?), and maybe only output reports for other users. I don't know if that's possible, I'm just trying to interpret and learn along the way.

[June7]

Yes, if the 'different content' Crash references is just the interface, separate db's is one approach. Or can have one db with menu form to select Shipping, Orders, etc.

[crash009]

Thank you all for taking the time to analyse my question. I know my English is not so good but i will try to give a scenario for u to have a better picture.

Suppose I am a manager. I have a team composed of 3 members (Alex, John and Sam).

the 3 of them have the same job to do. so in order for me to see what they have done, each team member will have its own front-end file with one table. at my level, i will have the back end file (combination of the 3 tables) that will allow me to monitor what they are doing.

I hope this scenario makes sense this time.

[June7]

That is contrary to conventional db split design for multiple users.

Your 'backend' is really a frontend linking to individual tables in 3 other databases. Where do those 3 dbs sit - on user computer C drive or on the central server? How will you link to those 3 dbs if they are on their C drives? The user computers would have to be set for sharing.

If those 3 tables are really identical in structure, then really should be one table in a backend file. Then everyone (including you) uses the same (copies on their workstations) frontend linked to the backend table.

[crash009]

Hey June7 !

Thanks for the swift reply !

As a matter of fact, we do have a common drive in a local network so linking them is not really an issue.

Under normal circumstances, sharing the using the same FE should be the optimal solution to my problem. But there is confidentiality that needs to be respected. One does not have to see what the other is doing.

Is that even possible? (sometimes i really think out of the box)

[June7]

If everyone has access to the common drive and knows where the files are, how safe are they? Each user db is in a restricted folder that only each respective user and you have permission to?

So yes, that may be your best approach. Locking down a single backend in a common location is apparently not easy.

[crash009]

Indeed you are right ! I know there is a way to prevent some users from accessing a specific folder in the drive but i forgot that synchronizing the f-e with b-e will not be possible if i do such thing.

I will try to find another way. many thanks for your time June7. I really appreciate it.

And sorry for the crazy questions ! as you may have noticed i'm still a beginner and i'm tryna find my way around.