July 25, 2008 12:51pm pdt

1. capricorn1 2,111,351
2. DatabaseMX 1,314,921
3. boag2000 590,019
4. LSMCons... 558,404
5. peter57r 446,668
6. harfang 412,103
7. GRayL 388,331
8. jimhorn 257,552
9. matthews... 250,724
10. cactus_d... 242,502
11. TextReport 236,057
12. hnasr 202,250
13. ee_rlee 173,155
14. angelIII 140,704
15. jefftwilley 140,435

1. capricorn1 9,768,389
2. nico5038 5,699,981
3. rockiroads 5,409,687
4. peter57r 3,891,163
5. LPurvis 3,394,721
6. LSMCons... 3,294,994
7. shanesue... 3,288,317
8. DatabaseMX 3,198,382
9. harfang 3,028,936
10. stevbe 2,857,111
11. jimhorn 2,677,144
12. GRayL 2,548,175
13. flavo 2,109,583
14. mbizup 2,021,084
15. jadedata 1,964,977

05.08.2008 at 05:11PM PDT, ID: 23388097

	[x] Attachment Details

[x]

The Solution Rating System

With so many solutions, how can you tell which solutions are most likely to help you and which ones are not? To provide you with a tool to use, we rate our solutions based on various elements that most accurately determine if a solution is a quality solution. To explain what factors affect the solution rating, here are the elements we take into consideration when formulating our solution rating.

The Grade of the Solution
The Zone Rank of the Expert Providing the Solution
The Number of Author and Expert Comments
The Number of Experts Contributing
The Feedback of the Community

Your Input Matters
Because of the way the system is set up, the most important variable in this equation is you. As a member of Experts Exchange, you are able to cast your vote on the quality of the solutions in regard to how complete, accurate, helpful and easy to understand each solution is. When you provide your feedback, each rating is adjusted accordingly. So, if you see a solution that has a poor rating that you think is a good solution, let us know by rating it. As you do, the rating will be adjusted and will become more accurate for other members of our site.

If you have any suggestions that you would like to make for our rating system, please ask a question in the Suggestions Zone of Community Support.

Thank you!

7.2

How to restructure a MS Access behemoth into a new moduled architecture.

Zones: Microsoft Access Database, Access Architecture/Design

Tags: Microsoft Access

I am currently working in MS Access, with an inherited application that is hitting critical mass.
It has 350+ tables, 500+ queries, 700+ forms, 100+ modules.
The application will continue to grow, so I am seeking advice on how to restructure the application's architecture.

At the moment there is a frontend and backend database.
The backend holds only the tables that change depending on the client/project, any common tables sit in the frontend.

With each new project our company gets, I often have to add many new objects (50-150) to the application that will be irrelevant to other projects. At the end of each project, I then take a copy and then clear out all the project related objects from the development version.
Because of the sheer size and changes required this can be a very difficult process as sometimes core functionality changes too, to meet new needs.

In the past we have kept parallel developments of the application (as clients come back to us for reworks), but this is now becoming unworkable.

What I think I want, is a common application with core functionality...with some type of architecture that allows me to develop the core application as a single project and lets me develop each project specific work as separate 'entities'.
I want to be able to link the common application to each project's specific part, depending on the client.
This will include project specific forms/tables/queries etc having to reference the core application....and visa versa.
it will require some recoding....but for know I am looking for a architecture solution.
What is possible with Access?

Start your free trial to view this solution

Question Stats

Zone: Microsoft

Question Asked By: Milkus1

Solution Provided By: Sudonim

Participating Experts: 7

Solution Grade: B

Translate:

Loading Advertisement...

20080236-EE-VQP-29 / EE_QW_2_20070628