Recommendation for Access database type

#11

Tony Toews <ttoews (AT) telusplanet (DOT) net> wrote in
news:fjh4j6pnm5utksvm6psorujtn5tqhpgajh (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

Quote:

Limitations
SQL Server [2008] R2 Express supports 1 physical processor, 1 GB
memory, and 4 GB storage
http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2...s/express.aspx

There are also replication restrictions. And the Express version
doesn't include all the management tools (it lacks SQL Profiler, for
instance, though you can download a free SQL Profiler for SQL Server
that works pretty well).

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

#12

On 14 Jan 2011 23:32:00 GMT, "David-W-Fenton"
<dfassoc (AT) dfenton (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

pieler8 <captainweet (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in
news:65ddee54-0148-4624-9211-6a1db6d98c6b (AT) r29g2000yqj (DOT) googlegroups.co
m:

Certain users who log into the database from other sites are
having performance issues in Access with Speed etc.

Would it be better if I setup a back-end/front-end database
structure here? The front end would sit on the person's hard drive
and backend on the network. Can i do the same append type query to
the network database without risk of corruption etc?

There is never a situation where you should not be set up as you
describe it here in the second paragraph. That is, unsplit databases
simply should not exist. And you should never share a front end,
either.

The first paragraph quoted above suggests that you're trying to use
Access across a WAN or the Internet. This, too, is something you
should never do. The easiest solution is deploying the app on
Windows Terminal Server, with everyone running the app using the
Remote Desktop Client.

That might be useful to me (I'm not the O.P.).

I have a situation where I need to allow remote (Internet, I
suppose) data-entry thru Access front-ends to a back-end
that is currently on a NAS box.

I've used Access for a number of years, but have no working
knowledge of networks. The setup we have is working ok on
the LAN, but when we tried to get a remote office set up, we
couldn't make it connect.

Getting back to your suggestion, would more than one client
be able to enter data at the same time? What would the
speed be like?

The last time I did anything with remote computer control
was about 1995, using PCAnywhere... and it was slow!

--
croy

#13

croy <croy (AT) invalid (DOT) net> wrote in
news:m2sbj65ff6vninr13ah25vldkqh2hp5t8p (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

Quote:

Getting back to your suggestion, would more than one client
be able to enter data at the same time? What would the
speed be like?

The last time I did anything with remote computer control
was about 1995, using PCAnywhere... and it was slow!

Windows Terminal Server is multi-user -- it's not very much like PC
Anywhere at all. However, your Windows server has to have client
licenses installed for multiple users. Otherwise, it's limited to 2
administrative-level logons.

And, of course, this is only relevant to a real Windows server, not
a workstation. There is software that can make a Windows workstation
into a terminal server for multiple users at once (Winconnect is one
that has been recommended by those I trust, but I've never used it
myself), but I frankly wouldn't recommend for production use.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Recommendation for Access database type

comp.databases.ms-access comp.databases.ms-access

Re: Recommendation for Access database type - 01-16-2011 , 04:09 PM

Re: Recommendation for Access database type - 01-18-2011 , 02:24 PM

Re: Recommendation for Access database type - 01-18-2011 , 04:57 PM