Any other way of data transfere?

Hey everyone,
I have more of a general problem that I need some advice on. In the app I am writing, I am pulling data from a backend Sql Server 2k to a PDA using PocketPC2002. (after long hours and lots of blood, sweat and tears my app is working and almost finished.) Tthe problem I and my team is facing is the fact that because I have to create a merge publication to enable data transfere, the tables used are locked up and no one can make any changes to those tables, unless the publication is deleted, changes made and the publication is recreated again.
Does anyone know of any other way of accessing data from a sql server 2000 db other than the merge replication or RDA methods that will not lock up the tables used? Or, is there a way that I am overlooking in using RDA that will not lock the tables in the database.
Any comments or suggestions?

Thanks in advance,
EricI'm sorry, perhaps I am being thick. If I may, can I try to restate your situation?

You have an App written for PocketPC. You are using the PocketPC version of SQL Server (dunno the actual product name). To enable data to then transfer to your main SQL server (on a network), you use Merge Replication.

The problem is that because it's Merge Replication, to make any schema changes to any of the articles included in the publication, you must delete and re-initialize the replication.

Have I correctly re-stated the problem, or did I miss something?

Regards,

hmscott|||You're not being thick my friend. Yes the problem as you stated it is correct. Forgive me as I am not a DBA, just an ordinary programmer who is dealing with databases right now. (Though I am learning).

So far the best solution we (I) have come up with is that I have created a Sql Script to delete the publication, then make the changes, and then recreate the publication. But, is this the only(or best) way to make any changes to the schema? The tables(articles) used in the publication are constantly locked up and the only other way I have been able to figure out to make changes is to do it through the properties form of the publication (for each individual article effected).
Is there another way I am missing?

Thanks,
Eric

Any need to convert DAO to ADO?

I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet
backend to SQL Server 2000.
It uses linked tables and DAO exclusively.
It's working fine.
Sooner or later, the front end will need to go to A2003 or whatever,
which I asssume won't be too much of a problem.
Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
A2003?
I can't see any justification at the moment.
Terry BellHi
There probably isn't any significant reasons to do this if you are keeping
Access as the front end, although it should help reduce the impact of the
upgrade to 2003.
John
<dreadnought8@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119167899.670346.155260@.g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet
> backend to SQL Server 2000.
> It uses linked tables and DAO exclusively.
> It's working fine.
> Sooner or later, the front end will need to go to A2003 or whatever,
> which I asssume won't be too much of a problem.
> Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
> A2003?
> I can't see any justification at the moment.
> Terry Bell
>|||BTW
You may want to post to an access newsgroup as they are more likely to have
indepth experience of this sort of conversion.
John
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uzQgLjKdFHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> There probably isn't any significant reasons to do this if you are keeping
> Access as the front end, although it should help reduce the impact of the
> upgrade to 2003.
> John
> <dreadnought8@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1119167899.670346.155260@.g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet
>> backend to SQL Server 2000.
>> It uses linked tables and DAO exclusively.
>> It's working fine.
>> Sooner or later, the front end will need to go to A2003 or whatever,
>> which I asssume won't be too much of a problem.
>> Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
>> A2003?
>> I can't see any justification at the moment.
>> Terry Bell
>|||Yes thanks - I posted to this newsgroup in error
Terry|||Hi
DAO and RDO are considered obsolete by Microsoft.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/mdac/techinfo/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnmdac/html/data_mdacroadmap.asp
--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
<dreadnought8@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119185731.468657.15010@.g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Yes thanks - I posted to this newsgroup in error
> Terry
>