Web-ifying an Access database / Security

[Pecanfan]

I've got quite a large database which is totally form-driven at the moment.
I now need to allow multiple users access to various parts of it and,
frankly, I'm not prepared waste my time with Access's inbuilt Workgroup
'security features' - it just seems way too clunky. I figured a more
sensible move would be to port over to SQL and drive it from a nice web
front end. Unfortunately my MS SQL experience is pretty much nil and my web
development skills are dubious to say the least (basic PHP / mySQL knowledge
only).

A while ago I looked into using the 'Pages' functionality within Access
combined with the upsizing wizard but it really struggled, the resulting
HTML wasn't exactly the cleanest I've ever seen and the database has grown
significantly since then.

What would people suggest would be my best way forward with this? To give
you an idea, the database isn't huge (36 tables, 39 forms and 64 reports)
but it is critical.

Do I call it a day and pay a development company to do it properly?

Andy

[Carl]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security

Hi,

If your looking to "web-ify" your database and replace all those forms
with webpages then it's not such a big job if you are familiar with PHP.
There are hundreds of modules available that will interface with your
database quite easily. Your reports can be viewed with the MS snapshop
viewer embedded into your web pages.

I know what you mean by Access data-pages.......not worth it for large
databases.



"Pecanfan" <pecanfan@no.sp am> wrote in message
news:1120232260 .171469@smtp-1.griffin.com.. .[color=blue]
> I've got quite a large database which is totally form-driven at the
> moment.
> I now need to allow multiple users access to various parts of it and,
> frankly, I'm not prepared waste my time with Access's inbuilt Workgroup
> 'security features' - it just seems way too clunky. I figured a more
> sensible move would be to port over to SQL and drive it from a nice web
> front end. Unfortunately my MS SQL experience is pretty much nil and my
> web
> development skills are dubious to say the least (basic PHP / mySQL
> knowledge
> only).
>
> A while ago I looked into using the 'Pages' functionality within Access
> combined with the upsizing wizard but it really struggled, the resulting
> HTML wasn't exactly the cleanest I've ever seen and the database has grown
> significantly since then.
>
> What would people suggest would be my best way forward with this? To give
> you an idea, the database isn't huge (36 tables, 39 forms and 64 reports)
> but it is critical.
>
> Do I call it a day and pay a development company to do it properly?
>
> Andy
>
>[/color]

[David W. Fenton]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security

"Carl" <mail2carl@_rem ove_yahoo.com> wrote in
news:jScxe.1250 0$iT1.7311@news fe1-win.ntli.net:
[color=blue]
> If your looking to "web-ify" your database and replace all those
> forms with webpages then it's not such a big job if you are
> familiar with PHP.[/color]

*SNORT*

Pardon me, but have you used both Access and PHP for any length of
time?

There's no comparison in level of complexity.

Access is point and click.

PHP is heavy-duty coding, even if you're adapting someone else's
code -- you've got to understand the code to be able to adapt it to
your specific circumstances.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security

"Pecanfan" <pecanfan@no.sp am> wrote in
news:1120232260 .171469@smtp-1.griffin.com:
[color=blue]
> I've got quite a large database which is totally form-driven at
> the moment. I now need to allow multiple users access to various
> parts of it and, frankly, I'm not prepared waste my time with
> Access's inbuilt Workgroup 'security features' - it just seems way
> too clunky. I figured a more sensible move would be to port over
> to SQL and drive it from a nice web front end. Unfortunately my
> MS SQL experience is pretty much nil and my web development skills
> are dubious to say the least (basic PHP / mySQL knowledge only).[/color]

This is just about the most idiotic thing I've ever read.

You have a working Access application.

You want to restrict access to parts of it, but you reject out of
hand the native methods for doing so, in favor of techniques you
know nothing about and would have to learn from the ground up.

And you think somebody here is going to try to help you, given those
facts?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Carl]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security

excuse you....

yup, it's sure alot more typing than clicking, but if you have the database
built and all the SQL, it's simply a matter of linking it all together.

I'm not that experienced with PHP as I am with Perl but I find both
languages easy to learn and work with.

When I first looked at a perl script, I thought I would never learn
how to understand all that gibberish. I mastered perl within a week
of reading a small book about the language.

I don't see PHP/Perl/ASP as 'heavy-duty'.....well not anymore.

"David W. Fenton" <dXXXfenton@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9686BC1 82EBCdfentonbwa ynetinvali@24.1 68.128.78...[color=blue]
> "Carl" <mail2carl@_rem ove_yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:jScxe.1250 0$iT1.7311@news fe1-win.ntli.net:
>[color=green]
>> If your looking to "web-ify" your database and replace all those
>> forms with webpages then it's not such a big job if you are
>> familiar with PHP.[/color]
>
> *SNORT*
>
> Pardon me, but have you used both Access and PHP for any length of
> time?
>
> There's no comparison in level of complexity.
>
> Access is point and click.
>
> PHP is heavy-duty coding, even if you're adapting someone else's
> code -- you've got to understand the code to be able to adapt it to
> your specific circumstances.
>
> --
> David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
> dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc[/color]

[jimfortune@compumarc.com]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security


Carl wrote:
[color=blue]
> When I first looked at a perl script, I thought I would never learn
> how to understand all that gibberish. I mastered perl within a week
> of reading a small book about the language.
>
> I don't see PHP/Perl/ASP as 'heavy-duty'.....well not anymore.
>[/color]

Yowch. If you put PHP in the same category of ease as Perl then I
might have to change some future plans. A professor in Turkey stated
that one of his grad students had tremendous success with PHP and
MySQL. I was considering trying out a PHP/PostgreSQL combination to
see what's involved. If PHP is as involved as perl I might reconsider
my little experiment. If you mastered perl in a week I have to commend
you. I feel that I pick up most new languages fairly rapidly, but that
was not the case with perl. I found perl to be quite 'heavy-duty.'
BTW, I was already familiar with using pointers before programming in
Visual C++ because I had written "programs" for my HP calculator that
took advantage of indirect addressing. Maybe perl just doesn't come
naturally to me. Awk was easy and fun. But perl is to awk what
canasta is to gin rummy. Perl is to awk what snooker is to 9-ball.
Your argument seems to support David's assertions.

James A. Fortune

[Larry Linson]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security


"David W. Fenton" <dXXXfenton@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote
[color=blue]
> This is just about the most idiotic thing
> I've ever read.[/color]

Hey, David, have you been hanging around Bill Gates? I've heard his favorite
expression is "That's the stupidest thing I ever heard." <GRIN>
[color=blue]
> You have a working Access application.
>
> You want to restrict access to parts of
> it, but you reject out of hand the native
> methods for doing so, in favor of techniques
> you know nothing about and would have
> to learn from the ground up.
>
> And you think somebody here is going
> to try to help you, given those facts?[/color]

I've always thought many of us were "gluttons for punishment". <GRIN> But,
surely, if Pecanfan has questions that are in our sphere of knowledge,
there'll be some of us who try to answer. We can advise people to stay out
of trouble, but we can't make them listen to (read) that advice and take it
to heart.

When the subject turns to PHP and MySQL, yep, I do suggest possible better
sources of information.

Larry

[Carl]

Re: Web-ifying an Access database / Security

James, if you compare Perl to PHP in terms of complexity then
yes, I have to agree that Perl is to awk what blackjack is to poker.

I find C++ very hard to learn, I commend you too.

This is starting to drift out the realm of this newsgroup so
i'm going to end it quick before the topic security arrive.



<jimfortune@com pumarc.com> wrote in message
news:1120264858 .706408.241020@ g49g2000cwa.goo glegroups.com.. .[color=blue]
>
> Carl wrote:
>[color=green]
>> When I first looked at a perl script, I thought I would never learn
>> how to understand all that gibberish. I mastered perl within a week
>> of reading a small book about the language.
>>
>> I don't see PHP/Perl/ASP as 'heavy-duty'.....well not anymore.
>>[/color]
>
> Yowch. If you put PHP in the same category of ease as Perl then I
> might have to change some future plans. A professor in Turkey stated
> that one of his grad students had tremendous success with PHP and
> MySQL. I was considering trying out a PHP/PostgreSQL combination to
> see what's involved. If PHP is as involved as perl I might reconsider
> my little experiment. If you mastered perl in a week I have to commend
> you. I feel that I pick up most new languages fairly rapidly, but that
> was not the case with perl. I found perl to be quite 'heavy-duty.'
> BTW, I was already familiar with using pointers before programming in
> Visual C++ because I had written "programs" for my HP calculator that
> took advantage of indirect addressing. Maybe perl just doesn't come
> naturally to me. Awk was easy and fun. But perl is to awk what
> canasta is to gin rummy. Perl is to awk what snooker is to 9-ball.
> Your argument seems to support David's assertions.
>
> James A. Fortune
>[/color]