By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
454,213 Members | 1,426 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 454,213 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

HELP ON WAN

P: n/a
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan because I am using
dial up which charges per minute. How can I get the database to be sharred
across miles with much stability and lower cost. I have read all the wan
posting but still does not apply to my situation. Is using a thin server/
terminal service means that I need to connect to the main server all the time?
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with the slow
connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.

Jack

--
Message posted via AccessMonster.com
http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/For...ccess/200603/1
Mar 2 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
6 Replies


P: n/a
"JACK GUNAWAN via AccessMonster.com" <u18520@uwe> wrote in message
news:5ca4c78130420@uwe...
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan because I am
using
dial up which charges per minute. How can I get the database to be
sharred
across miles with much stability and lower cost. I have read all the wan
posting but still does not apply to my situation. Is using a thin server/
terminal service means that I need to connect to the main server all the
time?
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with the slow
connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.
Terminal services is a great way to go, but you have a cost per minute, and
that really elimonates this as much of a possbilitry.

(unless, you can have uswers dail up....do whatever...and then
disconnnect....but, that sounds like a pain to me....

So, Terminal services will requite the prson to be connected to the internet
to use this system.
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with the slow
connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.


It is slow, but if you have no choices....you have no choices. I guess you
would have to use replication...and wait untill users can be connted to a
good quality network.

As mentioned, I do give some suggestions here..but they do assume a good
conneciton....

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal//Wan/Wans.html

There is just not much of a good solution here if everyone is going to be on
dial up....it is just slow. I suppose replication could work with dial up. I
would setup something to zip a data file (it will be at least 10 times
smaller, so data compress very well indeed). You the upload this zipped
replica to a server. You then sync it, and then download the replica. That
would likely be the fastest, and most reliable.

On the other hand, if you don't have a server, then just have the clients
zip up the file, and then email it to you. You then sync the replica....and
then zip it up..and send it back to the client. This would allow you to do
this without any server...the users would just use email. However, use
caution here, as you don't want to nickel and dime your approach as to be so
cheap as to not be worth the efforts. Those users need a good connection,
and perhaps were you live it is not available. Thus, as a last resort, the
email idea might work ok. You could start building some nice windows scripts
etc, and reduce the steps/training for end users so they don't grab a old,
or wrong replica from their email in box....
--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
pl*****************@msn.com
http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal
Mar 3 '06 #2

P: n/a
Albert D. Kallal wrote:
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan because I am
using

[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with the slow
connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.


Terminal services is a great way to go, but you have a cost per minute, and
that really elimonates this as much of a possbilitry.

Thanks for the assistance. However, i have problem with setting up the
replicas. I have replication manager but I don't know wheteer I can just
replicate the table I need so that the replica is small enough to zip. Maybe
with winzip? (Cause the database is 25mb) In addition, I am an ametuer and do
not know how to place the replica in a mail and how can I unzip the replica
in the mail and syncronize with easily as the end users are computer unaware.
I also have a different question. How can i connect two computers with
modems so that they can make a 'network' when the speed is 40 kbps. is it
possible. I have tried with incoming call in windows xp but the receiving
computer does not recognize the client even they are conected. Thanks so
much for the kind reply. Desperate.

Jack

--
Message posted via AccessMonster.com
http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/For...ccess/200603/1
Mar 3 '06 #3

P: n/a
"Albert D. Kallal" <ka****@msn.com> wrote in
news:lNUNf.93437$H%4.59846@pd7tw2no:
"JACK GUNAWAN via AccessMonster.com" <u18520@uwe> wrote in message
news:5ca4c78130420@uwe...
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan because
I am using
dial up which charges per minute. How can I get the database to
be sharred
across miles with much stability and lower cost. I have read all
the wan posting but still does not apply to my situation. Is
using a thin server/ terminal service means that I need to
connect to the main server all the time?
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with
the slow connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.
Terminal services is a great way to go, but you have a cost per
minute, and that really elimonates this as much of a possbilitry.

(unless, you can have uswers dail up....do whatever...and then
disconnnect....but, that sounds like a pain to me....

So, Terminal services will requite the prson to be connected to
the internet to use this system.
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with
the slow connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.


It is slow, . . .


No, indirect replication is *not* slow. Indeed, it's extremely
efficient, as it sends only the changes since the last
synchronization. It works fine on 28.8 dialup, usually taking less
than 10 minutes if you're synching regularly.
. . . but if you have no choices....you have no choices. I guess
you would have to use replication...and wait untill users can be
connted to a good quality network.
I would agree with this, though indirect replication is extremely
complicated and requires a lot of administrative care to keep
running smoothly.
As mentioned, I do give some suggestions here..but they do assume
a good conneciton....

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal//Wan/Wans.html

There is just not much of a good solution here if everyone is
going to be on dial up....it is just slow. . . .
Well, I would disagree on that. The problem is the per-minute
charges. Dialup that is charged per call would be just fine with
Windows Terminal Server on the other end.
. . . I suppose replication could work with dial up. . . .
Of course it does -- it works very well, in fact.

(please don't make comments about topics you haven't implemented
yourself!)
. . . I
would setup something to zip a data file (it will be at least 10
times smaller, so data compress very well indeed). You the upload
this zipped replica to a server. You then sync it, and then
download the replica. That would likely be the fastest, and most
reliable.
This is an incredibly stupid and wrongheaded recommendation because:

1. Jet replication only works reliably with in-place
synchronization. If you copy a replica to a new location (without
using the MOVE REPLICA function in Replication Manager, or
programmatically via the TSI Synchronizer or JRO), when it is
opened, it gets a new ReplicaID, because replica uniqueness is
determined by machine name/path (that is, if the replica started on
a computer called MyWorkstation as C:\Replicas\MyReplica.mdb and is
moved to YourWorkstation and placed in any folder, even
C:\Replicas\MyReplica, when the replica is opened in its new
location, Jet says "Ah-hah! This is not the same location as is
listed for this ReplicaID in MSysReplicas, so I need to assign a new
ReplicaID!" Each time you do this, you'd be copying over top of an
existing replica, and thus losing that replica entirely, but it
still remains listed in MSysReplicas. If any replication errors
develop in one of these replicas that gets killed by overcopying,
you end up with what those of us who are experienced in Jet
replication call "dead replicas" and they can eventually lead to
data corruption and completely loss of the replica set. Even one
such instance of an error means that you don't know if the replicas
all have identical data). MichKa explained why you can't do this in
this article:

http://trigeminal.com/usenet/usenet009.asp?1033

2. indirect replication will be far more efficient than shipping the
whole replica across the connection, anyway, because it sends only
the *CHANGES*. That's why it works so well, because it writew files
into a dropbox on the partner computer so that they can be applied
to the replica on the partner computer. This can happen in one
direction or both (usually you'd do a bi-directional synch).
On the other hand, if you don't have a server, then just have the
clients zip up the file, and then email it to you. You then sync
the replica....
NO NO NO NO NO!!!

This is incredibly bad and wrongheaded advice that you are giving in
complete ignorance of how replication works.

You've now put a post into the Google Groups archives that gives
advice that is completely mistaken and can lead to catastrophic data
loss.
. . . and
then zip it up..and send it back to the client. This would allow
you to do this without any server...the users would just use
email. However, use caution here, as you don't want to nickel and
dime your approach as to be so cheap as to not be worth the
efforts. Those users need a good connection, and perhaps were you
live it is not available. Thus, as a last resort, the email idea
might work ok. You could start building some nice windows scripts
etc, and reduce the steps/training for end users so they don't
grab a old, or wrong replica from their email in box....


Albert, this is all COMPLETELY WRONG.

WRONG.

WRONG.

WRONG.

WRONG.

WRONG.

Do *not* give advice on subjects with which you don't have
experience.

There are good reasons why I recommend people away from replication
unless it's required for their environment and unless they have a
competent programmer to implement it. It's because replication has a
whole lot of very specific requirements and dos and don'ts that are
not at all obvious until you've worked with it extensively.

You've just given advice that displays ignorance of both how
indirect replication works and of what kinds of things you're not
supposed to do with replication at all.

In future, please hold your tongue on any replication-related
subject, as your advice here is far more damaging than no advice at
all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Mar 3 '06 #4

P: n/a
"JACK GUNAWAN via AccessMonster.com" <u18520@uwe> wrote in
news:5cb57c3eb4f88@uwe:
Albert D. Kallal wrote:
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan
because I am using[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
Is using the indirect replication manager applicable to me with
the slow connection? Thanks for the kind help and attention.


Terminal services is a great way to go, but you have a cost per
minute, and that really elimonates this as much of a possbilitry.

Thanks for the assistance.


Please note that Albert's advice regarding replication .is ALL
WRONG.
. . . However, i have problem with setting up the
replicas. I have replication manager but I don't know wheteer I
can just replicate the table I need so that the replica is small
enough to zip. Maybe with winzip? (Cause the database is 25mb) In
addition, I am an ametuer and do not know how to place the replica
in a mail and how can I unzip the replica in the mail and
syncronize with easily as the end users are computer unaware.
You don't want to zip up the files. This is bad because it leads to
dead replicas and eventual corruption and loss of your replica set.

You need to implement indirect replication, which is *very*
efficient, because it sends only the *changes* to the data. I works
extremely well over even 28.8 dialup.
I also have a different question. How can i connect two computers
with modems so that they can make a 'network' when the speed is 40
kbps. is it possible. I have tried with incoming call in windows
xp but the receiving computer does not recognize the client even
they are conected.


You may have a problem with the user authorization. You have to get
your RAS (remote access services, which historically has applied to
dialup networking, but now includes remote desktop and VPN as well)
set up first, so that one computer can answer the incoming call from
the other one. You also have to have the remote computer configured
so that it sends a username and password that will give appropriate
permission on the receiving computer. It may be that your software
firewall is configured to disallow incoming RAS connections.

You also need to make sure that the security settings on your WinXP
box are configured correctly for RAS. I haven't set up RAS on a
workstation since WinXP, so I can't give you instructions. It
oughtn't be complicated for anyone with experience administering
Windows servers. My bet is that there are Knowledge Base articles
explaining how to do it on http://support.microsoft.com.

But indirect replication is definitely the way to go. Once it's up
and running, it should take 10 minutes or less to synch your data.
But be advised -- replication is complicated and hard to keep
running reliably, especially if you don't have a full understanding
of Windows networking and security.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Mar 3 '06 #5

P: n/a
David W. Fenton wrote:
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan because
I am using

[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]

Thanks for the advice David and Albert, as indirect replication is extremely
complicated and require a lot of administrative care to lkeep running
smoothly, I got scared. Can you please direct me step by step of indirect
replication and the do and don't of it so that my file will not go corrupt
and the adminstrative care too. Thanks so much, Confused.

Jack

--
Message posted via AccessMonster.com
http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/For...ccess/200603/1
Mar 4 '06 #6

P: n/a
"JACK GUNAWAN via AccessMonster.com" <u18520@uwe> wrote in
news:5cbadf1654a62@uwe:
David W. Fenton wrote:
Hi, I have trouble setting up an access database on a wan
because I am using

[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]


Thanks for the advice David and Albert, as indirect replication
is extremely complicated and require a lot of administrative care
to lkeep running smoothly, I got scared. Can you please direct me
step by step of indirect replication and the do and don't of it so
that my file will not go corrupt and the adminstrative care too.
Thanks so much, Confused.


I would suggest that you read the replication FAQ (on MS's website),
then all the replication-related articles on http://trigeminal.com,
then browse the Google Groups archive for the newsgroup
microsoft.public.access.replication.

Then post your questions there, as there's a handful of people
experienced with replication who can answer your questions.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Mar 4 '06 #7

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.