Microsoft Access 2003 Shared DBF, file is already in use

views:

109

answers:

Microsoft Access 2003 Shared DBF, file is already in use

Friend I am using MS Access 2003 I want to share MDB file on the network for this I put it in the shared folders with options shared database, and define user rights read only. because i just want to give them view only.

What I did I made another file & through link the tables from the shared database lying on the network.

Problem: If file is open in any pc so other user is not accessing he is getting message file is already in use. While file is in shared mode.

Please help me out.

+2 A:

Move the "Front End" to each users' pc, and link to the "Back End" on the shared folder/drive so each user has their own copy of the front end to view the data.

astander 2009-11-23 08:21:34

You can use the free Auto FE Updater utility http://www.autofeupdater.com to install the FE and keep the FE on each PC up to date.

Tony Toews 2009-11-24 20:15:41

+1 A:

If the user has read only rights on the folder which contains the back-end MDB/ACCDB, the first user in will lock the database, because the .ldb (lock file) needs to be updated. I usually give the user full permissions on the folder, but others say delete permissions are not necessary, because even though the .ldb file is normally deleted by Access when the last user leaves, it is not essential that this should happen.

Remou 2009-11-23 14:52:14

To clarify Remou's answer it is applicable to the folder on the server where the MDB/ACCDB containing the tables resides.

Tony Toews 2009-11-24 20:17:05

To follow on Tony's comment: you need to have appropriate permissions on both the SHARE and on the underlying folder that the share is making available across the LAN.

David-W-Fenton 2009-11-25 02:37:11

@messers Toews and Fenton: why not edit the answer? It's the Stackoverflow way, you know.

onedaywhen 2009-11-25 08:18:19

@onedaywhen As long as the edit is in line with the point being made by the original author, it can be a problem finding edits one does not agree with, this was discussed before on meta.

Remou 2009-11-25 10:52:33

@Remou: your last comment seems to contradict itself. Do you or do you not agree with the point made? You have neither countered them in comments nor edited your answer accordingly. I'll give it a go...

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 09:55:40

Why should I edit my answer when the comments are additional clarification? What is there to agree or disagree about? I am afraid I find you far to anxious to edit my answers.

Remou 2009-11-27 10:56:51

@Renou: "Why should I edit my answer when the comments are additional clarification?" -- Because the Stackoverflow FAQ (http://stackoverflow.com/faq) encourages it.

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 14:15:32

...also see the meta site e.g. "Is it OK to edit a correct answer for fullness instead of answering?" (http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/19477/is-it-ok-to-edit-a-correct-answer-for-fullness-instead-of-answering) It's not only OK, I think it's encouraged -- as long as you're not abusing the privilege of editing by changing the meaning of the answer. The idea is that the highest-voted or accepted answers are the most correct, and therefore editing someone else's answer to make it more complete is actually a truly selfless means of acting in the best interests of the S[OFU] sites.

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 14:16:52

...there was also something some Joel about how he wants people to edit answers, to move away from the sole-authoring mentality of the newsgroups but it seems to have been removed.

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 14:18:08

So why are you reluctant to accept edits to your answers that provide additional information without changing the meaning? Again from the FAQ: " Other people can edit my stuff?! Like Wikipedia, this site is collaboratively edited. If you are not comfortable with the idea of your questions and answers being edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you." Why aren't you comfortable with one of the touchstones of this site, Remou?

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 14:20:12

If David Fenton or Tony Toews had wished to edit the answer to add the points they made, that would have been fine. They did not, it was their choice and I respect it. The points they made stand well as comments and cannot be missed. Adding to the question invalidates their comments in a way that I find somewhat disrespectful. Had no comment been made, you would have been right to add to the question, IMHO, with the comments, I think such an addition is not quite right.

Remou 2009-11-27 14:34:20

I think the answer would benefit from having all the information in one place but let's not start a rollback war. I've posted another answer. But I still say Fenton and Toewes aren't using SO correctly by seeingly *avoiding* editing answers and it seems like you might be in agreement. 'nuff said.

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 14:50:12

Your belief seems to be so strong as to run contrary to three others. If you check meta, you will find a number of caveats on editing. There is a highly rated request to allow revised answers to be 'unaccepted'. I also find in a quick check that the top rated users do not seem to change other people's questions or answers very much.

Remou 2009-11-27 15:11:35

My main problem with edits is that someone can contribute content to the answer that converts it from a factually correct reponse to a misleading or incorrect one (as was the case in one of my many edit wars with @onedaywhen). Yet, even so, the original poster's name remains on the post, and, unless you examine the history of the edits (which only those with reputation sufficient to edit others' posts can do), you can't tell who contributed which parts. I'm quite capable of making myself look like an idiot without your help.

David-W-Fenton 2009-11-27 21:08:57

Quoting Remou, David W. Fenton and Tony Toews:

As regards the folder on the server where the MDB/ACCDB containing the tables resides, you need to have appropriate permissions on both the SHARE and on the underlying folder that the share is making available across the LAN.

If the user has read only rights on the folder, the first user in will lock the database, because the .ldb (lock file) needs to be updated. I usually give the user full permissions on the folder, but others say delete permissions are not necessary, because even though the .ldb file is normally deleted by Access when the last user leaves, it is not essential that this should happen.

onedaywhen 2009-11-27 14:27:03

I don't believe that Tony's LDB comments are actually applicable to this question, which involves a DBF file. That's one of the reasons I thought his contribution belonged in a comment, because it was somewhat tangential to the question being asked.

David-W-Fenton 2009-11-27 21:10:23

Sure and while you can't down-vote Mr Toews's comment you can indeed down-vote this answer.

onedaywhen 2009-11-30 08:48:27

...or even -- shock horror -- edit it to correct it yourself!

onedaywhen 2009-11-30 08:49:40

"I don't believe that Tony's LDB comments are actually applicable to this question" - please clarify, I cannot see any ldb comments by Tony.

Remou 2009-11-30 10:56:33

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

Microsoft Access 2003 Shared DBF, file is already in use

related questions