Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Post by SmltRWFnbG » Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:39:02


David,

Both tables and forms are available to the master and the replica. They are
not split. There was no LDB file to delete. Compact/repair had no effect.
Deletion of system.mdw had no effect.

--
.. jim ..
 
 
 

Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Post by David W. F » Wed, 26 Jul 2006 21:47:23

JimEagleOne < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in



I can't offer any further advice until you split the database. So
far as I can tell, that's likely to be the only remaining cause of
the failure.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.yqcomputer.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.yqcomputer.com/

 
 
 

Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Post by SmltRWFnbG » Thu, 27 Jul 2006 05:30:02

I'm not sure what you are asking me to try. Once a form is made in the master
of 2003, it is automatically replicated. I don't know of a way to
"unreplicate" it. Are you asking me to delete all forms from the master and
try resyncing?

--
.. jim ..
 
 
 

Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Post by David W. F » Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:23:59

JimEagleOne < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in



Open your design master.

Unreplicate all the forms, and reports and code and macros.

Import everything but the tables into a new MDB.

In the new MDB, create links to the tables in the back end.

Then delete everything from the design master that is not
replicated.

This is the absolute standard way for distributing Access apps, and
has been since forever (I've been developing in Access
professionally since 1996), and is the only way replication works --
replication is a Jet technology and works well (despite MS's claims
to the contrary) only with pure-Jet objects. That means tables and
queries. Everything else is not replicable in any practical sense,
and there is not real justification for it being replicable, since
design changes are only ever one-way, and never two-way.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.yqcomputer.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Post by SmltRWFnbG » Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:57:03

David,

Let me say again...I don't know of any way to "unreplicate" a form or a
report in Access 2003. Once it's created, it seems it can't be changed. I
can, however, unreplicate queries. Please show me the actual steps to turn
off replication of a form if you know it.

If I remember in Access 2002, I could unreplicate a form, but it got
changed in 2003.

The goal is to resync the data with the replica's when done. I'm not sure
how this is going to be possible with making and independent MDB.

--
.. jim ..
 
 
 

Subject: Replica fails to synchronize, Search key not found, 3

Post by David W. F » Fri, 28 Jul 2006 00:19:20

JimEagleOne < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in



Well, first off, I've never replicated a form in my life, in any
version of Access, because I understand how replication works, and
knew from the beginning that there was no reason to ever replicate
anything but tables.

But, to be helpful, I converted an A2K MDB to a replica, and found
that, yes, there is no Replicable property. However, if you import
the replicated form into a non-replicated MDB, it is not replicable
in the new MDB. So, it's pretty simple -- just import all your
non-table objects (including queries) into your new front end MDB,
and you'll be fine.


Access 2K can't do it, either.

And I never knew this, as it's something I'd never encounter, since
I would never even imagine replicating forms, etc.


Well, you change the DM and then synch with the problematic MDB.
That will delete the non-table objects and then maybe the problem
will go away.

Of course, if you can't synch at all, then this particular replica
is hosed from the standpoint of synchronization.

That's an expected eventuality when you replicate non-Jet objects.
It's unfortunate that the MS replication documentation still doesn't
make this fact clear.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.yqcomputer.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.yqcomputer.com/