Re: Why not Access...?
From: Anthony Thomas (ALThomas_at_kc.rr.com)
Date: 01/23/05
- Next message: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Referenced Memory Problem with Enterprise Manager"
- Previous message: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Host Name Change and Replication"
- In reply to: Norman Yuan: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Next in thread: RPK: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Reply: RPK: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:48:59 -0600
The first point is, yes, Jet, not Access, is a file based, Pseudo-RDBMS. It
is ISAM and, although it supports limited concurrency, it does not support
the RDBMS ACID properties, which are designed to gaurantee committed
transactions and failure rollback. Jet database will corrupt and become
unrecoverable. Restoration from file backup is your only option for safe
keeping.
Access, by the way is only a front-end to Jet, similiar to Outlook being the
MAPI front-end to Exchange.
However, as an ISAM system, Jet is extremely fast. So, the main question is
every client going to get their own backend, locally stored, database
system, or are they all going to connect to a central repository? If a
central repository, are local backends going to be refreshed through
replication or are the clients going to push and pull directly from the
central backend?
Answers to these questions will direct you to the correct system.
So you know, SQL Server Standard and Enterprise editions are the only
recognized centralized, server level supported, licensed solutions. SQL
Server Personal Edition is only for localized backends for client-side
applications developed for partially connected users, deriving its data from
already purchased, centralized organization stores already supported on SQL
Server Standard and Enterprise Editions. That is, Personal Edition is NOT
licensed for stand-alone usage.
The only desktop, back-end solutions, publically licensed by Microsoft are:
MS Jet/Access, MSDE, and SQL Server 2005 Express Edition.
Answer the questions above and repost and somewhere in this forum will be
able to assist.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
-- "Norman Yuan" <NotReal@NotReal.not> wrote in message news:%23ybO9cXAFHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... 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: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Referenced Memory Problem with Enterprise Manager"
- Previous message: Anthony Thomas: "Re: Host Name Change and Replication"
- In reply to: Norman Yuan: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Next in thread: RPK: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Reply: RPK: "Re: Why not Access...?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
