Synchronising with MS Access

[andyb]

We use MS Access for our works database and need to use a PDA out and about then sync with the main server when we get back...is this possible & how? :confused:

[Skip]

Never used it but can Access CE syncronise with a "normal" Access DB?

Oh and....

We use MS Access for our works database
:smt056

[timwilky]

Replace it with a proper database that supports distributed, federated etc. environments

[andyb]

Don't have a pop at me, it's got nothing to do with me (apart from I have to use it)! :) Is it possible though as I don't think it will be changed for a 'proper' database anytime soon.

[timwilky]

Not having a "pop". you need to tell your bosses they are taking stupid risks with company data etc. Expecting to be able apply modern working practices with turn of the century personal databases.

Do they have any form of governance, best practices etc. It is a risk I certainly would not take.

[blueto]

i do belive it is possible but you will need somone to maybe write the SQL in order for you to sink the rrequird data.

Its quite complex..and without being able to sit at the machine with the pda i wont be able to offer up the code.

[MavUK]

Not sure about this but...

Could you not use SQL 2005 Express? It's free (although it does have it's limitations) and will *possibly* replicate to SQL CE on your PDA's. Never used it though, and you may need a paid for SQL 2005 to get replication working (don't have an overview of the licensing in my head) - but maybe worth an investigation.

The only question in my mind is... Do they use Access as a database, or as a programming language? In which case you would need to rewrie everything in order to move to a new database...

[SoulKiss]

Replace it with a proper database that supports distributed, federated etc. environments

Shame on you Tim for implying that Access is actually a database

[andyb]

Not having a "pop". you need to tell your bosses they are taking stupid risks with company data etc. Expecting to be able apply modern working practices with turn of the century personal databases.

Do they have any form of governance, best practices etc. It is a risk I certainly would not take.

I wasn't being serious Tim, I know it's crap but I have to use it. It's sort of OK to use from my end :) Cheers so the help, sorry you took my post the wrong way Tim, appreciate the input.

[Dan]

I wasn't being serious Tim, I know it's crap but I have to use it. I work for the NHS but the 'database' only holds info about service history for medical eqpt so I don't think they're worried about risk to the data as such. It's the boss' baby but I have been trying to persuade him to change it but wont.

Never mind, it's sort of OK to use from my end :) Cheers so the help, sorry you took my post the wrong way Tim, appreciate the input.

Have you considered using BlackBerry and a simple data access web page hosted on your intranet to do this?

I work in NHS too and we're developing in-house a method to securely get patient history to a mobile GP's hand by pulling the data directly from our SQL databases. Same would work for Access.

[timwilky]

I wasn't being serious Tim, I know it's crap but I have to use it. I work for the NHS but the 'database' only holds info about service history for medical eqpt so I don't think they're worried about risk to the data as such. It's the boss' baby but I have been trying to persuade him to change it but wont.

Never mind, it's sort of OK to use from my end :) Cheers so the help, sorry you took my post the wrong way Tim, appreciate the input.


The NHS and your boss might not be worried, but from the customer ie patient end of things I would not like to think of NHS equipment service history being stored on an access database.

There are a number of commercial apps specifically developed for managing equipment service information. Additionally I would have assumed the NHS had licensing agreements in place with Oracle and Microsoft for their technologies.

I would guess your boss developed it himself. is proud of his development and nobody with the IT organisation of your trust knows anything about it, can support it or audited the app.

[Dan]

The NHS and your boss might not be worried, but from the customer ie patient end of things I would not like to think of NHS equipment service history being stored on an access database.

Neither would I, but it happens. There are several situations like that in my own environment, slowly being developed out of existence, but they're there. So long as they're safely backed up and not 'in sight' of the outside world the data's safe enough, no matter how inefficient and insecure the structure.

There are a number of commercial apps specifically developed for managing equipment service information. Additionally I would have assumed the NHS had licensing agreements in place with Oracle and Microsoft for their technologies.

We do, but what many people don't realise is the serious lack of decent IT resource in the NHS. Most of the money goes on pointless initiatives like NHS Direct, inefficient senior management and fancy new buildings, rather than on infrastructure, patient care and 'sharp end' employees.


I would guess your boss developed it himself. is proud of his development and nobody with the IT organisation of your trust knows anything about it, can support it or audited the app.


Nail on head, I would think.

[andyb]

The NHS and your boss might not be worried, but from the customer ie patient end of things I would not like to think of NHS equipment service history being stored on an access database.

There are a number of commercial apps specifically developed for managing equipment service information. Additionally I would have assumed the NHS had licensing agreements in place with Oracle and Microsoft for their technologies.

I would guess your boss developed it himself. is proud of his development and nobody with the IT organisation of your trust knows anything about it, can support it or audited the app.

IT know about it but don't support it, if that makes sense? Why could it be a problem being stored on an access DB as it's only eqpt history?

[timwilky]

OK, in order to answer this, a little of my background. For 20 years I put in place the IT systems required to support many of the worlds power stations during the engineering, procurement,erection and into operation processes. Part of this was the development of equipment databases. including combined cycle, coal and nuclear powered plants

In power stations when things go wrong. People tend to die

For equipment databases you would normally start at
Design critera
Operating environment
supplier information
maintenance schedule and procedures
operating procedures
maintenance qualification
operation qualification
then into actual who did what when and why etc.

Such things as qualification, ie who is authorised to do what etc cuts into the data protection act and you need to ensure the app is registered.

Now assuming something has gone wrong. Investigators would want to use the database to quickly established what had been done with that piece of plant, by whom, when, why, who had signed it off etc. How do you ensure operators/maintainers are aware of the latest operation/maintenance procedures etc.

So really you need a single source of data, linked to document libraries, linked to your job scheduling etc. How then to you ensure when something has gone wrong that no tinkering with the evidence takes place.

Access isn't robust. there needs to be a multi tiered hierarchy that ensure separation of the application from the data. How can you ensure that records cannot be changed. Control of the data, should not be the department tasked with acting upon it.

Do you not have auditors, process improvement etc. I am sure they would take a dim view of this sort of development

[andyb]

So really you need a single source of data, linked to document libraries, linked to your job scheduling etc. How then to you ensure when something has gone wrong that no tinkering with the evidence takes place.

Access isn't robust. there needs to be a multi tiered hierarchy that ensure separation of the application from the data. How can you ensure that records cannot be changed. Control of the data, should not be the department tasked with acting upon it.

Do you not have auditors, process improvement etc. I am sure they would take a dim view of this sort of development


Thanks for your help Tim, I'm going to note some of this down if thats OK and put some of these points to the boss?

[Defender]

I thought the NHS would have an in-house I.T. department which initiated ideas, resolved problems and could be called upon to help with all manner of similar queries.

I now have a picture of various NHS Departments / Trusts etc working on ad-hoc projects as and when, with no processes of communication within.

[andyb]

I thought the NHS would have an in-house I.T. department which initiated ideas, resolved problems and could be called upon to help with all manner of similar queries.

I now have a picture of various NHS Departments / Trusts etc working on ad-hoc projects as and when, with no processes of communication within.

Don't get me wrong, the NHS do a lot of good that people don't see, it only gets bad publicity which I feel is unfair. The NHS, IMO, does a lot of good and I don't think it's appreciated enough.

[Dan]

I thought the NHS would have an in-house I.T. department which initiated ideas, resolved problems and could be called upon to help with all manner of similar queries.

I now have a picture of various NHS Departments / Trusts etc working on ad-hoc projects as and when, with no processes of communication within.

You have to remember that the NHS employs more than 1.3 million people (only the Chinese army and Indian railways employ more). They are spread across the entire country, in thousands of different locations, performing thousands of different tasks.

If you work on the basis that the average UK organisation employing 250 people might have an IT department consisting of five people (1 manager, two server technicians and two grunts), that works out to one member of IT staff per 50 employees.

Scale that up and you have an IT department of 26000 people - in itself an organisation the same size as ICI.

It's these staggering numbers that result in the seemingly fractured environment in which we work. The organisation for which I work covers approximately 1 million patients, and in the area we cover I can think off the top of my head of over 100 different NHS sites, using more than forty different main clinical software products. To make all of these products talk to each other is a simply ridiculous project, but one on which billions of pounds of our taxes are being wasted.

Try finding an IT department anywhere in the UK which can cover the myriad different technologies, skills and products 24/7/365. If you can, the chances are it's going to be in the NHS. It has some of the most highly skilled and experienced IT teams and individual staff you will find ANYWHERE - it also has some of the most woefully lacking in skill.

The problems come from the sheer scale of the environment - not any lack of processes or communication - believe me, we work in one of the most over-controlled environments in the world.