RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection
From: GreySky (GreySky_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 10/22/04
- Next message: Matt Kisasonak: "Windows Clipboard & VBA"
- Previous message: Tim Ferguson: "Re: Can I schedule a Module?"
- In reply to: andrew: "RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection"
- Next in thread: andrew: "RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection"
- Reply: andrew: "RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:35:14 -0700
I'll go out on a limb here by speculating you would see nominal differences
between the two methods (i.e., ODBC DSN-based linked tables .mdb vs. .adp).
I believe that if you're using SQL Server, unless you have a need for the
additional capabilities afforded by use of a .mdb (e.g., easy user-specific
tabling, heterogenous data source linking, etc.), then stick with an .adp.
David
"andrew" wrote:
> Thanks Dave
>
> I am an Access developer who is trying to get to grips with SQL Server. I
> am familiar with creating split front-end/back-end .mdb applications.
>
> I have several fairly small databases to create. They will be for about 5/6
> simultaneous users with a low volume of traffic. I want a SQL Server back
> end with a distributed front end. It seems sensible to use Access for the
> front end as I know it and it is available.
>
> I am not trying to migrate existing databases so I simply want to get to
> grips with the options and settle on a good approach to making the connection
> between the two. There are lots of sites with code samples, but few of them
> explain what are the advantages and disadvantages of each method (e.g. DSN
> vs. DSN-less) or when is the best time to make the connection (when opening
> the application; when opening a form etc.) or open a recordset. You mention
> linked-table .mdb or true client/server .adp - I am in a position where I
> could choose either, though I have assumed that .adp is better.
>
> I created a connection using the Access connection wizard (though I have a
> feeling it would be preferable to use code) - this is what gave me the
> read-only connection. I have since re run the wizard and am now able to
> write - I have no idea why it worked 2nd time but not 1st as I didn't do
> anything different!
>
> This is a long winded way of saying I need more information, where is the
> best place to go?
>
> Thanks
>
> Andrew
>
> "GreySky" wrote:
>
> > There isn't a simle answer to the "best" architecture: linked-table .mdb or
> > true client/server .adp. Either method will yield a highly stable, scalable,
> > flexible, and powerful application. A .mdb uses Jet over SQL Server
> > (performing querying on the user's computer, and allowing local tables that
> > are user-specific and providing the best heterogenous datasource processing
> > I've ever seen), while a .adp doesn't even load Jet, and essentially you're
> > using MS Access as a developer toolset on SQL Server (the best, might I add;
> > if a little memory-hungry).
> >
> > Either method will not restrict you to read-only access. If you are using a
> > .mdb, and you linked in the tables, did you provide MS Access with the Unique
> > Index on the table? When you link in a SQL Server table, it asks you for the
> > unique index. If you press "Cancel," it won't create this "pseudo-index,"
> > and you're table will be read-only.
> >
> > If this isn't the problem, I'll need more specific information on how you're
> > using the database.
> >
> > David Atkins, MCP
- Next message: Matt Kisasonak: "Windows Clipboard & VBA"
- Previous message: Tim Ferguson: "Re: Can I schedule a Module?"
- In reply to: andrew: "RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection"
- Next in thread: andrew: "RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection"
- Reply: andrew: "RE: Access Front End & SQL Server Back End Connection"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
