Re: Why not Access...?
From: Norman Yuan (NotReal_at_NotReal.not)
Date: 01/23/05
- Next message: Shaker: "Host Name Change and Replication"
- Previous message: Aaron [SQL Server MVP]: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- In reply to: RPK: "Why not Access...?"
- Next in thread: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Reply: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:13:26 -0700
It well depends how the database is used, such as the data access work load,
mostly for data browsing or heavily being updated, how many users, how big
the data volume will eventually be, the status of the network, and so on.
When using Jet database (*.mdb), either VB front-end or Access front/back
end, someone would suggest the concurrent users not more than 20 or 30,
someone may suggest a lot more. Although it is file based database, it does
not mean a huge table has to be loaded to client computer in order to read a
single record (Jet engine handles it pretty smart and well. There were quite
some debate on this in the past in different NGs, and most people tend to
accept this. But I did not see a support argument from those who developed
JET engine). Anyway, *.mdb may be suitable enough to your situation with
obvious advantage: no extra cost on DB server, no special db server
management skill is required. no Access installation is required, it version
(Access2K, XP, or 2003) is regardless here.
On the other hand, a database server, like SQL Server, gives you a lot more
power to your application. As you may know that MS stop put further effort
on JET database (still improve Access, the application, though). They are
pushing SQL Server and its desktop version MSDE/SQL Server2005 Express.
Since MSDE is free and completely compatible to SQL Server, you may want to
look at MSDE for now. Once your DB app grows, you can move it to a full SQL
Server almost effortless.
"RPK" <RPK@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F5F5D478-265F-40BB-8EBC-06545D4B5025@microsoft.com...
> I am developing a desktop application using VB as front-end for some
clients
> where the a large number of regular entries are done but there is a rare
need
> to delete old customers. Since some of the customers are regular customers
> since years.
>
> I am deciding which database to you.
>
> If I use Access XP, people say that it uses Flat File system and whole
Table
> is loaded into memory when the Table is accessed. If the size of the Table
is
> very large, the performance may become sluggish.
> Secondly, I have not found anything special in Access XP security.
>
> If I use SQL Server 2000 or higher, then I want to know what features,
other
> then client/server, will I get as compared to Access XP. Will I be able to
> use "Replication" at run-time so that multiple copies are
> synchronized simultaneously, for database security.
> Which edition of SQL Server 2000 to use for desktop applications? I am
> presently using Personal Edition.
> I also want to schedule SQL Server Backup on client's machine, so that it
> can regularly take backups. Is it possible with VB or I need to install
any
> other SQL Server utility on client's machine.
>
> I used Personal Oracle 8, but it cries on systems with 128 MB of RAM.
Oracle
> 9i just can't work on these machines, and my clients are having these
> machines.
> I did not notice any sluggish performance with SQL Server 2000. What's the
> reason?
>
> Help me out.
>
- Next message: Shaker: "Host Name Change and Replication"
- Previous message: Aaron [SQL Server MVP]: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- In reply to: RPK: "Why not Access...?"
- Next in thread: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Reply: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
