Whenever a user connects to an Access database, a locking file is created.
This file has the same name as the database, but with an extension of .LDB
instead of .MDB (or .MDE or .ACCDB or .ACCDE) and exists in the same folder
as the database itself. (and no, it's not possible to change its location)
This locking file is how Access controls concurrent updates to the database.
If a user only had read access, with no write (and create) permission, then
no other user will be able to update the database.
You can leave the database in MDB format, and Access 2007 will then still
support user-level security. It's only in the ACCDB format that there's no
ULS.
You can leave the database in MDB format, and Access 2007 will
then still support user-level security. It's only in the ACCDB
format that there's no ULS.
Yet a whole lot of people (and I'm not referring just to lunatics
like Aaron Kempf) seem invested in propagating the myth that ULS
(and replication) are not supported at all in A2007. Any time I see
someone say that I immediately think "this is not someone who gives
reliable advice -- I will discount anything I see from them in the
future."
Yet a whole lot of people (and I'm not referring just to lunatics
like Aaron Kempf) seem invested in propagating the myth that ULS
(and replication) are not supported at all in A2007. Any time I see
someone say that I immediately think "this is not someone who gives
reliable advice -- I will discount anything I see from them in the
future."
Ok, that all makes sense. So the only way to get user-level security is to
change it to .MDB, and therefore I would loose the database features that are
only available in 2007?
Other than multi-value fields (which I can't imagine any
professional developer actually using), what features does ACCDB
have that MDB lacks?
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.