Hello!
I am trying to gather information on why MS SQL Server 2000 is a better enterprise level database management system MS Access 2002. There is an article on the Microsoft Technet, but when I try and access the article I get a 404 error. Link is there, but page behind is missing.
http://www.micrsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLAccess.asp
I know the basics, just want stats and facts to back them up.
Thanks...Originally posted by swestenhofer
Hello!
I am trying to gather information on why MS SQL Server 2000 is a better enterprise level database management system MS Access 2002. There is an article on the Microsoft Technet, but when I try and access the article I get a 404 error. Link is there, but page behind is missing.
http://www.micrsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLAccess.asp
I know the basics, just want stats and facts to back them up.
Thanks...
1) Volume of data
2) Scalbility
3) Performance
4) OLAP
5) Security features
6) Easy Query processing
7) Data distribution and replication
8) Job scheduling
9) Programmability
There are lots of reasons like this. Access is good if your data is less than 2GB and depends what you are looking from a database.|||Access is not a database "Server". Thus, if you have a query in Access that joins a parent table with 10,000 rows to a child table with 100,000 to return a filtered set of records consisting of, say 200 rows, Access will transfer all 110,000 records from both tables over your network and then perform the SQL statement on whatever (slow) desktop the user happens to be at.
Under SQL Server, all the calculation is done on the (powerfull quad-processor, RAM out the wazzoo) server, and only the final 200 rows are returned over your network.
In a nutshell, running Access as an Enterprise solution drags a network to its knees.|||Originally posted by blindman
Access is not a database "Server". Thus, if you have a query in Access that joins a parent table with 10,000 rows to a child table with 100,000 to return a filtered set of records consisting of, say 200 rows, Access will transfer all 110,000 records from both tables over your network and then perform the SQL statement on whatever (slow) desktop the user happens to be at.
Under SQL Server, all the calculation is done on the (powerfull quad-processor, RAM out the wazzoo) server, and only the final 200 rows are returned over your network.
In a nutshell, running Access as an Enterprise solution drags a network to its knees.
Thanks all!! This should be good fuel for my client to use... thanks for the help!|||Hey...no one told him about the cost...
What's the differences between a kia and a bentley?|||Originally posted by Brett Kaiser
Hey...no one told him about the cost...
What's the differences between a kia and a bentley?
I know the cost differences involved, and the client is aware as well, and in the long run, user connection timeouts and database size limitations may outway the costs based on recovery and migration...
Thanks again!