By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,475 Members | 1,915 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,475 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

DFS (Distributed File System) and Access 97

P: n/a
Dan
Hi,

We have a Windows 2000 network with a couple of Win2k servers. I'm looking
at fault tolerance with regards our Access databases , of which we have a
number of backend mdbs sitting on the server, with front ends residing on
the clients.

Normally, if the server holding the Access backends goes down, it's a case
of restoring last official data backup onto the spare server and then
individually remapping all the clients to this folder. This, as you can
appreciate, takes some time.

I've started reading about DFS (Distributed File System) in Windows 2000.
Whilst I acknowledge that on the fly file replication is no good for mdb
files, I was hoping that DFS set up correctly could at least take care of
the mappings to the spare server without me having to do it on each client.

Any advice on this? Is there a correct way to use DFS with Access or should
I steer clear?

Thanks

Dan
Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
2 Replies


P: n/a
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:09:43 +0000 (UTC), "Dan"
<Da*@reply-to-newsgroup-please.com> wrote:

Servers don't go down that often - I hope.

I would write some reattach logic in the FE applications, and send the
users a message when the server goes down "Please close and reopen
your Access applications, and when prompted connect to the back-ends
at \\server2\someshare

I wouldn't necessarily trust DFS or any other technology to have a
consistent backup of the database in case of a server crash. I would
rather play it safe and restore a backup.

-Tom.
Hi,

We have a Windows 2000 network with a couple of Win2k servers. I'm looking
at fault tolerance with regards our Access databases , of which we have a
number of backend mdbs sitting on the server, with front ends residing on
the clients.

Normally, if the server holding the Access backends goes down, it's a case
of restoring last official data backup onto the spare server and then
individually remapping all the clients to this folder. This, as you can
appreciate, takes some time.

I've started reading about DFS (Distributed File System) in Windows 2000.
Whilst I acknowledge that on the fly file replication is no good for mdb
files, I was hoping that DFS set up correctly could at least take care of
the mappings to the spare server without me having to do it on each client.

Any advice on this? Is there a correct way to use DFS with Access or should
I steer clear?

Thanks

Dan


Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
Dan
Servers don't go down that often - I hope.

I would write some reattach logic in the FE applications, and send the
users a message when the server goes down "Please close and reopen
your Access applications, and when prompted connect to the back-ends
at \\server2\someshare

I wouldn't necessarily trust DFS or any other technology to have a
consistent backup of the database in case of a server crash. I would
rather play it safe and restore a backup.

-Tom.

Thanks Tom,

I'm thinking of using DFS for the share/mapping rather than the replication.
If server1 goes down (containing the backend mdb) the share to the data
would now point to the data folder on server2 which would have no mdb. I
would then restore a backup of the last working mdb to the data path on
server2. Obviously there would be a short outage whilst I restore the mdb to
the new location, but it would cut out the task of physically updating the
mappings on each client. I think this is what Doug Steele does, as detailed
in this newsgroup posting last year (unless I've got the wrong end of the
stick!):

"Unless you're using DFS differently than we do, you don't actually have the
same file on two different servers. What DFS allows you to do is treat
multiple servers as a single share point: you map a drive to \\server\share,
but the folders that are underneath that share point can be on multiple
servers. In other words, if you've mapped \\server\share to your G: drive,
G:\Folder1 might actually exist on server1, while G:\Folder2 might exist on
server2."

Dan
Nov 13 '05 #3

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.