Pros and Cons

Well I'm not going into the pros and cons but I would put all my eggs in one basket (1 db with all countries in the same tables)

And if you designed your Access fron-end correctly you would only need one of them too.

Sure, terry, that way the total size of the database(s) would be smaller than separate databases, Enterprise Manager would look a LOT "cleaner", the number of ODBC connection strings would be 1/NumberOfDatabases, but IF something goes wrong and we need a backup, it would restore the entire database and perhaps it's just the data from Denmark that need to be restored. I had another reason for keeping the databases separate, but forgot it again... :(

I'd have to rewrite some of the code in the frontend (lots of functions uses tablenames - hardcoded, and they are NOT global variables!)

I can see your point in backup/restore but SQL Server is much more reliable than Access.

(lots of functions uses tablenames - hardcoded ...)
the table names can be the same as they were before.

I work all the time with data from different countries and I would never concider puting the data in different tables/databases. This would make maintenance much more compex.

"I work all the time with data from different countries and I would never concider puting the data in different tables/databases. This would make maintenance much more compex"

Yes, I agree, hence my question - when your firm expands over multiple divisions or countries, it's time to think in terms of other solutions than just creating YET another, IDENTICAL, database.
Thanks a lot, terry, please "post an answer". :)

And dont forget the upsizing wizard in Access.
If you upsize one of your dB's then make any alterations such as new field containing country ID for example. Then I would think it would be best to use SQL's import functions along with DTS to import the other databases.

:)
I ALWAYS use DTS/ SQL's Server's import function. :)

thanks and good luck :o)