I need to make a decision regarding a simple web based database. I haven't been able to find a conclusive answer to my question: Should I use SQL Server or MS Access? The db will have less than ten tables and theoretically will be accessed by up to 20 users simultaneously. I'm not worried about size necessarily, more worried about performance and the simultaneous users. I'd rather use the simpler, less expensive solution, but will go to SQL if I have to. Any thoughts?
Originally posted by rdjabarov
Consider also that SQL requires administration, while Access only file maintenance and occasional repair. It all depends on how valuable your data is... And post the site URL if it is
I agree with this statement in general, but this probably won't grow (maybe I'm being short-sighted.) As far as MSDE is concerned, I've looked at that and would probably be the solution but would require the SQL host. From the research I've done, SQL hosting is about $25 more per month. This project is for a charity that is already going to be pushing the budget with their new broadband connection. My goals, in order, to implement the correct solution, spend as little money as possible, and then make it as easy as possible for me. That being said, everybody still think SQL (or MSDE) is the best solution?
Originally posted by rdjabarov
That'll do it, use SQL. This way if you choose to expand it, it's already there. Also, don't try to come up with the solution that answers your today's question, see if it can answer tomorrow's needs.
Personally, I dissent. I believe that an SQL server would be an appropriate solution; hosted on the web host. There is no charity in this world which can't afford $25 a month, and if the database has 20 users on it at a time, obviously that database is "operationally important" to the business of the charity. (If 20 users are "down" for even 2 minutes a month unnecessarily, that $25 you tried to save is gone anyway.)
Perhaps the web-hosting service will offer a discount to a non-profit; many do. But the bottom line is that, as with any other business's database, continuous availability and reliability and efficient performance is paramount... to the business. In my humble, Access won't deliver that. An SQL server (of any type) will.
just because there are 20 people browsing the site at the same time does not mean they will each press a button or click a link that requires database access at the same time
i could go to the site, browse their online store, click to add an item to my cart... and how many other users will be clicking to add to their cart at exactly the same second, versus still looking at the products and trying to decide? you could have hundreds of simultaneous site visitors without anywhere near half a dozen simultaneous database users
I ,may be off base, and please don't flame me, but I have applications that run with access and have more than 20 concurrent users and I have never had a problem. You may also want to check out www.coveryourasp.com that site is running access for the backend, and it gets alot of traffic.
I do agree that SQL is the ultimate route to go if you have the $$$$ and the time.