View Poll Results: Does SQL Server generally cause LESS problems than Access for medium sized dbs?

Voters
4. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, definately

    2 50.00%
  • Yes, to some degree

    2 50.00%
  • About the same amount of probs

    0 0%
  • No, SQL generally causes more probs

    0 0%
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    6

    Question Unanswered: Any Input Welcome: Migrate from Access to SQL Server

    My group is discussing a migration from Access 97 to SQL Server. Both the front-end application and back-end db is in Access 97. Our database is growing in size, now exceeding 20,000 records in some tables and potentially we'll end up with about 50,000 records. We've also experienced quite a few db corruptions and other various strange problems. This makes us just not trust that our data is safe in the Access db.

    We want to keep the Access front-end and make as few modifications to it as possible, since it's quite complicated and large. There are also time and budget limitations that hider us from re-writing the front-end thouroghly. Our first thought is to stick to DAO and replace the current links to the Access db with ODBC links to a SQL Server db.

    My main concerns are performance (since we'd not use SQL in an optimal way, staying with DAO) and stability (would our data really be more safe with such a solution?).

    If anybody has some experience of doing this or similair, any input would be very appreciated!

    Thanks
    Niklas

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    67
    Many developers, including myself feel that DAO is still the best way to go with Access. DAO works just fine with accessing data in SQL Server you just need to make sure that your SQL in Access is written so that SQL Server likes it and won't throw any errors.

    I use Access as a frontend to a SQL Server backend quite a bit at work. As long as the SQL Server db is configured properly (indexes, etc...) the performance is usually not an isssue. It actually improves database security and integrity (i.e - won't corrupt on you every Monday morning).

    Since we are on the subject, I am growing very tired of MS Access corrupting on me as well; most of the time we can't tell what's really causing the issue. I think it has something to do with the networks and the server the .mdb is residing on. MS Access is very tempermental to say the least.

    I recommend you go with SQL Server and be sure to fully test your new frontend/backend environment COMPLETELY before going into full use with it.

    Good luck in any decision you make.
    Don't do today, what can be done tomorrow.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    12

    Cool

    hmmz...

    in my oppinion i think SQL server should be more interesting since u have over 20k records ... ive got 60k records in an msaccess database but i use oracle ..

    in anycase ive got an sql server as well and it never crashed yet ..
    running 1 year solid now without a reboot ..

    however the performance of the sql server must be maintained.. as far as for access ive never got "strange" things yet with my oracle/sql server sollution ..

    my best recomendation is use SQL server due to import factors (quite easy compared to oracle :P)



    for a test u should run msaccess and sql server ( with limited records) and test performance

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •