You can split your data into one or more additional database files, and then create links to satellite tables from the main application database.
Although this strategy may allow you to use more than 2 GB of data stored in Access, it is not a great choice. One mistake is that you cannot provide referential integrity between tables in different db files; this fact in itself can make a partition into a non-stationary system for many applications.
Another problem is temporary workspace. When the db engine needs a disk file for workspace, it uses a temporary file. And this temporary file is also limited to a maximum of 2 GB. Therefore, if you have 6 GB of data distributed between 4 dB files of 1.5 GB each, and you need to do something that requires working with more than 2 GB of this data, you may receive an error message complaining lack of disk space. This does not mean that the disk is full; this means that the required temporary workspace is more than 2 GB.
In fact, having made this separation once in the past, I no longer want to do this. To request access to manage this large amount of data is simply unreasonable; I had to spend too much time waiting for him to do almost everything I asked. It is much better to disable this work for a more efficient database system. Thus, this is not only a problem of the overall storage capacity, but also how well the storage database can handle large data sets. Access can become a client of a client-server database.
I also think that you should critically examine what you store. For example, some people like to store images. I do not. Instead, I save the path to the image file. The same goes for other file types. You may find that you can live without storing BLOB files, you can reduce the size of your DB-drive to a level below 2 GB and continue access to the storage.
source share