On 12/14/2021, SemiAnnual Enterprise channel updated to version 16.0.13801.21086. This is causing several strange behaviors in Microsoft Access. For example: Create a new Access database on a network drive or open an existing database from a network drive. Close it. The .laccdb file is not automatically deleted (even though no other users are in it). Use DAO to OpenDatabase for shared (non-exclusive) access. Error 3050 (“Could not lock file.”) is thrown and the database is not opened. Databases opened on a network drive appear to always be opened for exclusive access. Once one person has opened a database, others can't--even when opening for shared access. Reverting to the prior version 16.0.13801.21050 fixes the problem. This problem seems specific to databases located on a network share. For databases on a local machine, there is no issue.

Firstly, these are peer to peer forums and Microsoft does not necessarily actively participate, and even rarer is it when someone from the Access Dev Team is here. So don't could on such content/support. If you want answers, call support and open tickets. Use the application feedback button. Remember, the squeaky wheel gets the grease! The answer right now is rollback and wait. Could be days, weeks, months, years, ... it may never get fixed. Who knows at this point in time. We're already 22 days into this mess and we've haven't heard anything about addressing these networking issues with the official 'fix' and I learnt a long time ago not to count of Microsoft! Fix it yourself by rolling back the update and move on, be done with it. Better that than wasting more time on the issue and having employees unable to work.

Even with the updated build, using DFS paths will prevent multi-user access. Fow now, you will have to use a direct network path to the database if you want to have multiple instances accessing the same database. Our organization has multiple MS Access databases shared via DFS. DFS being deployed as an enterprise solution to presenting file shares. This patch has been extremely disruptive with the 2nd patch not resolving the issue. How soon can we expect a full resolution? We are in the same situation. Multiple MS Access backend dbs shared out via DFS through an Access front end db. We are in need of a timeframe on when this issue will be resolved? It does not make sense for my organization to roll back desktop machines to an older version of Office 365 and disable updates, only to have MS release a fix soon after. I'm in the same situation where 40 users cannot work due to this error. A fix to this problem soon would be very useful - I cannot understand a big company like Microsoft doesn't give an answer to when they expect to fix this - or are they not able to fix it? A simular problem occurred last year and I'm starting to consider using another database with serious support.

Even with the updated build, using DFS paths will prevent multi-user access. Fow now, you will have to use a direct network path to the database if you want to have multiple instances accessing the same database. Our organization has multiple MS Access databases shared via DFS. DFS being deployed as an enterprise solution to presenting file shares. This patch has been extremely disruptive with the 2nd patch not resolving the issue. How soon can we expect a full resolution? We are in the same situation. Multiple MS Access backend dbs shared out via DFS through an Access front end db. We are in need of a timeframe on when this issue will be resolved? It does not make sense for my organization to roll back desktop machines to an older version of Office 365 and disable updates, only to have MS release a fix soon after.

This problem seemed to be fixed, but yesterday MS updated my office and again, I am having it.

Lock File Problems with Access 16.0.13801.21086

Anonymous

On 12/14/2021, SemiAnnual Enterprise channel updated to version 16.0.13801.21086. This is causing several strange behaviors in Microsoft Access. For example:

Create a new Access database on a network drive or open an existing database from a network drive. Close it. The .laccdb file is not automatically deleted (even though no other users are in it).
Use DAO to OpenDatabase for shared (non-exclusive) access. Error 3050 (“Could not lock file.”) is thrown and the database is not opened.
Databases opened on a network drive appear to always be opened for exclusive access. Once one person has opened a database, others can't--even when opening for shared access.

Reverting to the prior version 16.0.13801.21050 fixes the problem.

This problem seems specific to databases located on a network share. For databases on a local machine, there is no issue.

Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.

0 comments

98 answers

Anonymous

2022-01-04T16:19:10+00:00

Firstly, these are peer to peer forums and Microsoft does not necessarily actively participate, and even rarer is it when someone from the Access Dev Team is here. So don't could on such content/support. If you want answers, call support and open tickets. Use the application feedback button. Remember, the squeaky wheel gets the grease!

The answer right now is rollback and wait. Could be days, weeks, months, years, ... it may never get fixed. Who knows at this point in time. We're already 22 days into this mess and we've haven't heard anything about addressing these networking issues with the official 'fix' and I learnt a long time ago not to count of Microsoft! Fix it yourself by rolling back the update and move on, be done with it. Better that than wasting more time on the issue and having employees unable to work.
Was this answer helpful?

0 comments No comments
Anonymous

2022-01-04T15:06:03+00:00

Even with the updated build, using DFS paths will prevent multi-user access. Fow now, you will have to use a direct network path to the database if you want to have multiple instances accessing the same database.

Our organization has multiple MS Access databases shared via DFS. DFS being deployed as an enterprise solution to presenting file shares. This patch has been extremely disruptive with the 2nd patch not resolving the issue. How soon can we expect a full resolution?

We are in the same situation. Multiple MS Access backend dbs shared out via DFS through an Access front end db. We are in need of a timeframe on when this issue will be resolved? It does not make sense for my organization to roll back desktop machines to an older version of Office 365 and disable updates, only to have MS release a fix soon after.

I'm in the same situation where 40 users cannot work due to this error. A fix to this problem soon would be very useful - I cannot understand a big company like Microsoft doesn't give an answer to when they expect to fix this - or are they not able to fix it? A simular problem occurred last year and I'm starting to consider using another database with serious support.
Was this answer helpful?

0 comments No comments
Anonymous

2022-01-03T19:16:49+00:00

Even with the updated build, using DFS paths will prevent multi-user access. Fow now, you will have to use a direct network path to the database if you want to have multiple instances accessing the same database.

Our organization has multiple MS Access databases shared via DFS. DFS being deployed as an enterprise solution to presenting file shares. This patch has been extremely disruptive with the 2nd patch not resolving the issue. How soon can we expect a full resolution?

We are in the same situation. Multiple MS Access backend dbs shared out via DFS through an Access front end db. We are in need of a timeframe on when this issue will be resolved? It does not make sense for my organization to roll back desktop machines to an older version of Office 365 and disable updates, only to have MS release a fix soon after.
Was this answer helpful?

0 comments No comments
Anonymous

2022-01-01T16:13:05+00:00

This problem seemed to be fixed, but yesterday MS updated my office and again, I am having it.
Was this answer helpful?

0 comments No comments
Deleted

This answer has been deleted due to a violation of our Code of Conduct. The answer was manually reported or identified through automated detection before action was taken. Please refer to our Code of Conduct for more information.

Comments have been turned off. Learn more