Back/forward converting fe&be while developing OK? (97/2K)

Topic

New Reply

Dear members of the board,
at my office we use Office 97. I have developed a database with a front and back end. The development for the next version might be done on my portable which uses Office XP. Therefore, I suppose it’s best to convert both front- and backend to 2K, do my thing (structural backend + front end changes) and convert back to 97 for use at my office. This might be repeated several times.
I do I risk any data damage or other corruption? Then I’ll have to change plans…
Hasse
p.s. The backend contains already data of a previous working year (which I’ll try to convert and keep available in the database. It appeared better to me to do the changes on the good-data-database then to make all changes and then import all data from the original one. Is that a good choice too, or does that really make no difference…

Reply | Quote

Replies

If you take care not to use Access 2000/2002 specific features, it should be possible to develop in Access 2002. Make sure to make backup copies frequently.

Importing existing data into new tables can pose a problem with AutoNumber fields, you’d have to take care not to destroy relationships.

Reply | Quote

If you take care not to use Access 2000/2002 specific features, it should be possible to develop in Access 2002. Make sure to make backup copies frequently.

Importing existing data into new tables can pose a problem with AutoNumber fields, you’d have to take care not to destroy relationships.

Reply | Quote

Actually, if you are going to stick with 97, I don’t see any compelling reason to convert the back-end, as all you are doing is connecting to its tables. The only downsides we’ve seen in that arrangement is a fairly significant performance hit, and a tendency to corrupt more frequently – but in a development environment neither of those are likely to hamper you.

Reply | Quote

Both, thanks for your feedback !

Hans, thanks for pointing me at the Autonumber issue! This makes me even more sure not to try to (if I don’t need to) ‘develop elsewhere and then import’
And yes… of course… thanks for remembering… backup backup backup

Wendell, thank you too… just FYI:
[indent]

---

Actually, if you are going to stick with 97, I don’t see any compelling reason to convert the back-end, as all you are doing is connecting to its tables.

---

[/indent]
I have to covert the backend to allow me to make the database structures: new fields, new tables & relationships (tblAtblB becomes tblAtblCtblB), etc.
[indent]

---

The only downsides we’ve seen in that arrangement is a fairly significant performance hit, and a tendency to corrupt more frequently – but in a development environment neither of those are likely to hamper you.

---

[/indent]
Yeah… I’ve read around here about those 97 backend – 2K frontend -issues too. And I think I got a hit already too . As I started with some front-end changes first, Access went down a first time already, far too soon. I wouldn’t be surprised if the not-yet-converted backend had something to do with it .

Reply | Quote

Both, thanks for your feedback !

Hans, thanks for pointing me at the Autonumber issue! This makes me even more sure not to try to (if I don’t need to) ‘develop elsewhere and then import’
And yes… of course… thanks for remembering… backup backup backup

Wendell, thank you too… just FYI:
[indent]

---

Actually, if you are going to stick with 97, I don’t see any compelling reason to convert the back-end, as all you are doing is connecting to its tables.

---

[/indent]
I have to covert the backend to allow me to make the database structures: new fields, new tables & relationships (tblAtblB becomes tblAtblCtblB), etc.
[indent]

---

The only downsides we’ve seen in that arrangement is a fairly significant performance hit, and a tendency to corrupt more frequently – but in a development environment neither of those are likely to hamper you.

---

[/indent]
Yeah… I’ve read around here about those 97 backend – 2K frontend -issues too. And I think I got a hit already too . As I started with some front-end changes first, Access went down a first time already, far too soon. I wouldn’t be surprised if the not-yet-converted backend had something to do with it .

Reply | Quote

Actually, if you are going to stick with 97, I don’t see any compelling reason to convert the back-end, as all you are doing is connecting to its tables. The only downsides we’ve seen in that arrangement is a fairly significant performance hit, and a tendency to corrupt more frequently – but in a development environment neither of those are likely to hamper you.

Reply | Quote