Microsoft Access - Sub-Unit Database?

Discussion in 'Army Pay, Claims & JPA' started by Adjutant, May 31, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Does anyone have/use their own Access Database to hold info on their sub-unit?

    If yes, did you write it yourself?

    Is it worth the effort?

    Am contemplating creating one - but I'm sure its been done before, so grateful for any leads...

  2. We used one in place of the traditional 'Troop Commander's Notebook'. It all looked very gucci but suffered in 2 key areas:

    1. It wasn't as handy as an actual notebook and
    2. Shit in - shit out.

    That said, I may do it in my next job...
  3. Only problem is what happens when you get posted though? And the next guy doesn´t have the same knowledge as you or your system crashes for some reason?
  4. Filemaker Pro is easier to use, IMHO, than MS Access, a lot more intuitive and form creation is easy too
  5. And don't forget that if you create a database with personal information on it that you will have to register it with your DPO and comply with the DPA!
  6. Paymaster,

    You don't get out much, do you? I was so close to putting something about your sort in my original post but left it just to see how long it would take before your sort pointed it out!

    JPA of course, complies with all of the above - and no one in the Army has ever, ever kept a database which didn't comply...

    Nice one!

  7. Something else to possibly think about is depending on where you keep the database, it may or may not get migrated when your site gets f'd.....
  8. Adjutant, I've written loads (a bit of an Access freak in my time...yawn).

    What info do you want to store/process? Can I be presumptive and surmise, from your username, that it's a G1 thingy?

    Like another user said, there are complications with running Access over DII, but they're not unsurmountable.

  9. A2_Matelot

    A2_Matelot LE Book Reviewer

    PD, how very dare you!

    A practising CIS professional pimping himself online - SoINC will turn in his sleep!

    As said previously, all well and good creating said masterpiece of Access - its the subsequent upkeep -having equally been an Access freak in a form er life I applied said skills to my military life when I perceived the system didn't provide the goods. I have subsequently (on many occasions) had meetings with the brass to explain why my little gem is still alive, unsupported and needs money to live on.........

    And as far as F goes I have a rig at work that refuses to let Excel and Access work, initial Application Hosting Environment issues they say :oops:
  10. Ha ha, it's in my nature to be helpful! Team player and all that. :D
  11. So PD,

    Whats your thoughts on where to build in the business intelligence layer - in the DB or application level..... hehe! You geek you!

    Anyway - thought you just 'supervised' this sort of thing now...!
  12. There's good reasons why F doesnt come with access as standard. Some sub-unit DB's grow into extremely complex beasts and rarely have any documentation or build data at all. This is fine and dandy until the thing falls apart and what was meant as a small tool to help the R&I out turns into the most business critical application in the world. I've seen one storing the entire units BFG licensing details and speeding/parking fine information. Was being stored on local drive and had never been backed up. The entire DB was never seen again once F rocked up and swapped the machine out.

    Its up to Authorised Demanders and the authorising budget holder to ensure that access is only given to those who absolutely need it. If Defence need tools to carry out daily business processes, Defence along with ATLAS should be providing the tools to ensure that the correct level of assurance and support is available.
  13. BM - Access DBases as such are not designed to be as big as some of them get.

    ATLAS should be offering to convert them to SQL dbases which is designed to handle the amount of data some of them hold but at a cost although I do believe that SQL is supported under contract where as depending on the Access version it isnt

    Although I may be wrong on the support thingy
  14. Access as an application is fully supported - but therin lies the rub. ATLAS will quite happily re-target the application to your UAD when it goes tits, but there the support ends. The databases that get created are nothing more to the contractor than user created product. If the DB files corrupt and the backup doesnt work either they wont give a rats. Having one of the lads come up with the all singing, all dancing, access DB that runs the unit at the click of a dashboard button might be great for CR time and the short term. Generally, it will break and drop you in the sh1t or go to ratshit when the designer is posted.

    It is possible to host SQL applications on the RLI although you have to go through DG ISS to have them hosted.
  15. On F you have Access runtime which allows databases to be used, but not authored.

    You can cheat and just copy a database into F, or go the official way and you should state the requirement of your database, have someone to support it (e.g. Cpl Bloggs looks after it), and have an exit strategy, (a definition or a future replacement)

    You then get one authorised user for full access to support the database but limited support to your datafiles, (as said before they will restore your backup but not support the development)

    I've just managed to upgrade an Access 3 database developed by a former colleague in 1997 as a data capture for a future system. Now though the replacement system is developed, delivered and paid for the powers that run our servers won't activate as 1/3rd of the new system can be replaced by a tri service future package. This means unless we get the justification through we are stuck with Access for the forseeable future.