Re: Access Retirement
- From: "Pat Hartman\(MVP\)" <patsky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:55:03 -0500
There is no reason to convert existing applications from DAO to ADO. DAO is
still better for Jet tables and with A2003 DAO moved back into place as the
default library.
Converting to A2K is pretty silly with two newer (and FAR better) versions
available and a third to be released next year.
Even if you get to the point of having too much data or too many users for
your data to remain in Jet tables, you don't have to rebuild the front end.
You can simply transfer all the data from Jet to SQL Server or some other
RDBMS and with some changes to the front end, be up and running far faster
than if you had to rebuild the entire application.
There are two problem areas when "upsizing" - column and table names, if you
have used non-professional names, may need to be changed. And - forms must
be modified to use queries with selection criteria as their RecordSources.
If you don't do this, you will not achieve any performance gains because
your forms will just act like data pumps, dragging record after record
across the network until ever record in the RecordSource has been downloaded
to the client PC.
"Ram" <Ram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1B39F65C-86D2-4A43-84F7-F0A405FD1F4F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Basically the migration approach is approved in 2 phases. 1st phase, just
> migrate the data which is in Access 97 and move it to SQL 2K and in the
> second phase, convert Access Forms to web based forms using C#. For phase
> 2,
> the buegets are allocated in Q1, 2006.
>
> Since i couldn't give more info in my previous mail, thought of sharing
> the
> same now with u.
>
> When i migrate the 97 database, can Access 2000 front end still work with
> Jet Engine or i'll have to rewrite the queries and push to SQL as stored
> procedures (if i plan to use ADO instead DAO)?
>
> Ram
>
> "Brendan Reynolds" wrote:
>
>> Support (other than self-help online support) for Office 95 and Office 97
>> has already ended ...
>>
>> http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifeoffice/
>>
>> I will not attempt to guess whether you should migrate the databases to
>> SQL
>> Server or not as I don't have nearly enough information. But note that
>> you
>> do not have to choose between upgrading the applications to a later
>> version
>> of Access and migrating the databases to SQL Server - you can, if
>> appropriate, do both.
>>
>> --
>> Brendan Reynolds
>>
>> "Ram" <Ram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:EAB49505-FCC0-4A2F-9225-C4C99E114009@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I don't know this is the relevant place or not, but i need information
>> > about
>> > Access 97 support.
>> >
>> > Can anyone tell me till when Microsoft is going to support Access 95
>> > and
>> > 97?
>> > Is there any URL that i can know the timelines when and what product
>> > will
>> > be
>> > pulled out from the Product support?
>> >
>> > I need to upgrade few Access older version applications to the latest.
>> > Here
>> > i need to take a call, should i upgrade to Access 2003 or migrate the
>> > databases to SQL2K?
>> >
>> > Please someone reply to me. You can directly mail me at
>> > ramakrishna.vakacherla@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > I need this info to convey my client before EOD today. (15th Nov, 05)
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance for your support and sorry if i wrongly posted the
>> > msg
>> > in
>> > a diff group.
>> >
>> > Ram
>>
>>
>>
.
- References:
- Re: Access Retirement
- From: Brendan Reynolds
- Re: Access Retirement
- Prev by Date: Re: Converting Access 97 MDE to Access 2003
- Next by Date: fyx
- Previous by thread: Re: Access Retirement
- Next by thread: What the hell is this?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
