SQL Server vs. Access

SQL Server vs. Access

Post by Alex Balagou » Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:00:00



Hi,

As part of our senior seminar project in my school, we are developing the
following system for a local business. Please advise as to what would be a
better solution, Access or SQL Server (if you have a minute, please indicate
why) For right now we are only concerned with the back-end portion of the
project. The front-end will most likely be VB5 or 6.

We are designing and installing a system to track orders as they move
through the plant.
There are    seven bar-code scanning stations. (with barcode readers
attached)
                     four office PCs
                     one server
Scanning stations scan the orders and update/create a single record in the
table which is on the server. Different stations would NEVER try to access
the same record at the same time, however they will try to access different
records in the same table at the same time.
Four office machines will hit the database for different reports.
We anticipate that every station will do aprox. 500 scans in an 8 hour day.

I was told that Access is not appropriate for this situation, for two
reasons
    one, Access has difficulties handling simultaneous access to the same
table,
    two, Access will create too much traffic for the LAN
                                                (which we plan to set-up as
10megabits,
                                                 but we can probably get
enough money for
                                                 100megabits, if this is
necessary)

Are these reasons accurate?

Thanks for any input,

Alex


 
 
 

SQL Server vs. Access

Post by Wayne Snyde » Thu, 22 Oct 1998 04:00:00


The problem with Access is that it is not a client/server database, so no
processing can occur on the back end... If one the clients issues the
command

select * from orders where order_id = '1234'

Every order moves across the network to your local PC. The appropriate
record is then selected, and the others are ignored... This can seriously
load up a network... If most of the users will be adding, with very few
selects, this will not be as much of a problem.. Reporting could be done
from a central station.

Many of the banks around here (C*te) do not allow Foxpro/Access/Dbase
kinds of applications on their corporate network for just that reason...it
eats up the network... However if the number of records is small may it will
be OK...

On the bright side, Access is really easy to develop applications with,  if
simple is a primary objective.

--
Wayne Snyder
MCSE, MCT, CSPDBA
IKON Technology Solutions

 
 
 

SQL Server vs. Access

Post by robert stac » Fri, 23 Oct 1998 04:00:00


On Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:40:38 -0400, "Alex Balagour"


>Hi,

>As part of our senior seminar project in my school, we are developing the
>following system for a local business. Please advise as to what would be a
>better solution, Access or SQL Server (if you have a minute, please indicate
>why) For right now we are only concerned with the back-end portion of the
>project. The front-end will most likely be VB5 or 6.

Use sql.
It will allow you to "program" at the server in sql. This  is a lot
harder than using the Access wizzards to create your app but even nt5
is moving towards SQL for these reasons. Might as well learn what will
be in the marketplace when u go looking for a job( assuming this is an
educational project)
Quote:>We are designing and installing a system to track orders as they move
>through the plant.
>There are    seven bar-code scanning stations. (with barcode readers
>attached)
>                     four office PCs
>                     one server
>Scanning stations scan the orders and update/create a single record in the
>table which is on the server. Different stations would NEVER try to access
>the same record at the same time, however they will try to access different
>records in the same table at the same time.

Never say NEVER in it... say should ( then program for should not!)
Quote:>Four office machines will hit the database for different reports.
>We anticipate that every station will do aprox. 500 scans in an 8 hour day.

>I was told that Access is not appropriate for this situation, for two
>reasons
>    one, Access has difficulties handling simultaneous access to the same
>table,
>    two, Access will create too much traffic for the LAN
>                                                (which we plan to set-up as
>10megabits,
>                                                 but we can probably get
>enough money for
>                                                 100megabits, if this is
>necessary)

The 10/100 cards are about the same as the comparable  10m only
cards.. about $10-20 more(3com). The cat5 wiring will cost the same. A
hub could cost a few bucks more...

The issue is not the money but  cabling length and quality to get the
100m to work properly.... always go for the new technology as soon as
it is price competitve( which 100m has been for about a year now.)

 Don't worry, someone will still say 100 megs is slow no matter what
the app. and ..it will be obsolete fast enough.

Just remember if you don't look at the issues of installing 100m
wiring up front you may pay the same for a 10m cabling plant which
could have run at 100m if it was designed properly up front. :)

Hope this helps.

r.stacey cne mcse mct

>Are these reasons accurate?

>Thanks for any input,

>Alex



 
 
 

SQL Server vs. Access

Post by Rebecc » Wed, 28 Oct 1998 04:00:00


I work for an IP Telephony company and we're developing a billing application
for a pre-paid calling over the internet..... using *gulp* ACCESS as the front
end to Microsoft's SQL server 6.5.

We're constantly running into problems, needless to say, with the ACCESS
application.

I was wondering if you could help us identify some of the problems we're having,
and perhaps tell us what's going on.

1. Write Conflict in ACCESS:  An error message pops up prompting to Copy Changes
to the clipboard or abort changes made to a record in a form (record is sitting
on SQL server).  This error occurs when data is entered into SQL database using
the ACCESS application.  This error *does not* occur when that data is entered
using SQL into the SQL database (thus, those records can be updated using the
ACCESS application without errors).

2. Downloading records onto ACCESS remote machine takes forever and apparantly
will lock up after 53 records.

3. What is the SQL server's buffer size as opposed to ACCESS' buffer size?

thanks,
rebecca


> The problem with Access is that it is not a client/server database, so no
> processing can occur on the back end... If one the clients issues the
> command

> select * from orders where order_id = '1234'

> Every order moves across the network to your local PC. The appropriate
> record is then selected, and the others are ignored... This can seriously
> load up a network... If most of the users will be adding, with very few
> selects, this will not be as much of a problem.. Reporting could be done
> from a central station.

> Many of the banks around here (C*te) do not allow Foxpro/Access/Dbase
> kinds of applications on their corporate network for just that reason...it
> eats up the network... However if the number of records is small may it will
> be OK...

> On the bright side, Access is really easy to develop applications with,  if
> simple is a primary objective.

> --
> Wayne Snyder
> MCSE, MCT, CSPDBA
> IKON Technology Solutions

 
 
 

1. SQL Server vs. Access

Hi,

Is there a general way to find out at what database size
I should use SQL Server instead of Access.
My database will have about 50.000 records ( each record has
got about 150 Byte ) per year and I'm not sure if in a few
years time this database will explode. The database itself
has got a quite simple structure with seven tables.

Thanks for any help, Robert

2. synchronize?

3. SQL Server vs. Access comparison

4. Disconnected recordset

5. SQL server vs. Access

6. Data conversion from FM5.5

7. Using SQL Server vs. Access for Queries

8. Join question

9. SQL Server vs. Access

10. SQL Server vs. Access 95

11. SQL Server vs. Access BackEnd Split Database

12. comparison of SQL Server vs. Access