If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Read-only share/link to single table?
I see a lot of threads out there about how to split a database, or installing
user-level security.... What I'd like to do is the following - There's a functional area that keeps contact information up to date for a certain class of customers, let's call them "Hydraulic Manufacturer Contacts". That's information that isn't primary to another area, but they've kept that as additional information on their own table in their own database. Obviously, this is not ideal and creates data integrity issues as two separate areas try to maintain the same information on different tables. What I'd like to do is get rid of "Group 2's" table on their database, and link it to "Group 1's" table. However, "Group 1", the owners of this data, are uneasy about someone else being able to mess with their table. Is there a way to link to that table, and use it as a read-only table in "Group 2's" database? How should I set up or tweak that link to make this happen? Sorry if this is something that's obvious.... I did try and find something similar out there. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Read-only share/link to single table?
=?Utf-8?B?YWVtQW5keQ==?= wrote in
news Is there a way to link to that table, and use it as a read-only table in "Group 2's" database? How should I set up or tweak that link to make this happen? If Group 2 is able to delete records from the table, then there is no way to protect the Group 1 mdb records from being orphaned. You can always run exception reports on, for example, Group 1 records without Group 2 parents and enable some kind of error recovery, but it'll always be a step behind. If you can put up with that, then there are ways of keeping Group 1 not too far behind. The simplest is simply importing a copy of the relevant Group 2 table into the Group 1 database on a regular basis -- weekly, daily, hourly etc as required. This means that the Group 2 data would be completely isolated from any changes made "down stream". It is probably possible to create a "snapshot" type of querydef that reads the data in the Group 2 database and exposes that to the Group 1 database but which would not allow any updating of the records. The final solution would be to install user level security and protect all the data behind RWOP queries (Google for that if you need further information). You can give the Group 1 people access to a query that only exposes the fields and records that they are entitled to. The main difficulties here are actually the human ones about who controls the data and who will be allowed the privilege of accessing them. That's much harder than database design!! Hope that helps Tim F |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Read-only share/link to single table?
This is a typical problem in a large company. The end result is dozens of
conflicting copies of what should be the exact same data. The correct solution is to either modify group1's table to add the additional attributes for group2 or to add a new table to group1's database to hold group2's data but be related to the group1 table in a 1-1 or 1-m relationship so that referential integrity can be enforced. The separate table solution will probably be the most palatable but it is imperative that the two tables be in the group1 database so that RI can be enforced. Then group2's database can link to the table with their data and you can lookup data from the shared table via DLookup()s which will keep the group1 data from being updated via the group2 database. However, if group2 ever needs to update the common data, you will need to escalate the problem so that hegemony of the data can be shared. "aemAndy" wrote in message news I see a lot of threads out there about how to split a database, or installing user-level security.... What I'd like to do is the following - There's a functional area that keeps contact information up to date for a certain class of customers, let's call them "Hydraulic Manufacturer Contacts". That's information that isn't primary to another area, but they've kept that as additional information on their own table in their own database. Obviously, this is not ideal and creates data integrity issues as two separate areas try to maintain the same information on different tables. What I'd like to do is get rid of "Group 2's" table on their database, and link it to "Group 1's" table. However, "Group 1", the owners of this data, are uneasy about someone else being able to mess with their table. Is there a way to link to that table, and use it as a read-only table in "Group 2's" database? How should I set up or tweak that link to make this happen? Sorry if this is something that's obvious.... I did try and find something similar out there. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Need Suggestions, brain gone blank | Gina Whipp | Database Design | 11 | January 26th, 2006 12:19 PM |
Query is not updatable - | Doug Johnson via AccessMonster.com | Running & Setting Up Queries | 3 | January 21st, 2006 12:36 AM |
Multiple Options Group | Patty Stoddard | Using Forms | 19 | August 4th, 2005 02:30 PM |
Here's a shocker | Mike Labosh | General Discussion | 2 | October 26th, 2004 05:04 PM |
Table Wizard Does Not Set Relationship if Foreign Key and Primary Key Name Do Not Match Exactly in Case. | HDW | Database Design | 3 | October 16th, 2004 03:42 AM |