Replication / Synchronisation Question

[LittleSmudge]

I have a Replicated database with a number of distributed replicas which the db aministrator synchronises using the Synch Wizard ( Tools, Replication, Synchronise Now ... )

In the Directly With Replicas ...
dialog box there appears a list of all the replicas.

Some of these no longer exist. However, I can find NO WAY of getting rid of these redundent entries.
I've tried the usual 'arrow down to the entry and hit delete' but to no avail
and Help files are no help either.

As the list of out of date entries grows it is becoming messy.

does anyone know how to get rid of the unwanted entries in this list ?



G LS G LS
accessaceNOJUNK@valleyalley.co.uk
Remove the NOJUNK to use.

 

[maca9]

I had the same problem.

What you need to do is try to replicate with those repliceas that no longer exist.

Access will then say they can't find them and that they will be deleted from the replica set.

Sometimes however you will actually need the folder to exist where the old replica was for this to work.

So if the folder is no longer there just create an empty one for the purpose of this exercise then delete it.

Hope this helps.

 

[lrumd]

Look at Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 198950
You will have to re-create the folder and the replica, then delete it. The problem apparently arises when someone deletes the folder. You need to re-create the folder with the same address (ie \\server\public\database\mydatabase ) and synchronize, then delete it. It worked for me

HTH

Luis

 

[MaxEd]

How do you use the Replication feature? I've not used before. I am trying to Create a database for multiple users who will only browse the data via a form. If anyone could give me some pointers on how the replication works that would be great. I've tried replicating but when I create new queries they don't sync up for some reason. Please help! Thank you.

-Laughter works miracles.

 

[LittleSmudge]

MaxEd -

If your users are not changing the data you have no need for Replication.

Replication is for users that need the database live to enter/update data but are not connected to the network ( or are on a slow link ans in my case )
Replication allows all of the various changes to be 'Synchronised' with the master datastore so that each database keeps up-to-date.


If your users are 'on the network' then just let them all open the same database.
If they are no 'on the network' just send them each a copy of the database.


'ope-that-'elps.



G LS
accessaceNOJUNK@valleyalley.co.uk
Remove the NOJUNK to use.

 

[MaxEd]

Littlesmudge,

I have one user who updates the data on the database and I develop and maintain it. One more question about Access if you could answer is how are the queries handled when I have over 50 users on the application? Do they each create their own instances of the query or will the queries start overlapping each other and crash? I mean I have not created any multi user databases before, just single users. Thanks.

-Laughter works miracles.

 

[LittleSmudge]

The general answer is that they all work independently.

YOU don't need to do anything special.

Multiple users can open the same Xxxx.mdb file on a server and read data quite happily.

If the 50 users are going to be WRITING data then you stand a much greater chance of clashing.
Access does not cope well with data contention caused by multiple users editing the same record simultaniously.

On a more detailed level at 50 users reading the database I'd be prepared for some drop off in response performance.

If you are still developing the database whilst it is in use then you really do need to split it.
Tables in the BackEnd and Queries, Forms, Reports, Modules in the FrontEnd.
( Link the tables in the backend to the FrontEnd using FilesMenu, GetExternalData, LinkTables )

You can then work on a development copy of the front end whilst the users work on the data. Replace the Front End file when all the users are off the system and hey-presto they all get your design updates and the data is unaffected.



'ope-that-'elps.



G LS
accessaceNOJUNK@valleyalley.co.uk
Remove the NOJUNK to use.

 

[MaxEd]

Littlesmudge,

So replication was a bit of an overkill? I guess the users don't really need the tables and the queries all at once but I thought since the database was rather small that it wouldn't be a performance issue if I kept it all together and it simplifies the updating process. I guess I should be fine since if it's on a network drive that it'll probably create a local copy on to each users pc and they'll be basically running it on their own pc. I don't expect this database to grow larger than 10 MB.

-Laughter works miracles.