"David Segall" posted...
How come Access is not in the list there? Access can handle up to
10 or 20 connections concurrently with little problem (personally
tested, although MS states up to 2^8 concurrent connections).

It's a very effective relational database, Lavasoft uses it in their
"Lavasoft Personal Firewall" to log events.

<shrug> It works great for connecting to other databases,
including Excel files, text files (.cvs, .xml, et al).

..mdb files can be deployed with any application without paying any
extra moneys for special licensing. The .mdb though requires a
Microsoft Windows OS, so Microsoft gets their money through the
sales of the operating system.

Curious...

--
Jim Carlock
Post replies to the group.

"Jim Carlock" <anonymous (AT) 127 (DOT) 0.0.1> wrote:

definition because defining it was too difficult for me. I assumed
that anyone reading the page would define "heavy-duty" as having most
of the features of all the databases I listed. In that context
Microsoft does not consider Access as "heavy-duty" and provide their
reasons in
<http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/d/0/5d026b60-e4be-42fc-a250-2d75c49172bc/Access_Whats_Right.doc>.

I really don't know if an Access database is free although it is
definitely freely deployable. Obviously, Access itself is not free but
do the free .Net development environments include a Jet database
engine that allows you to create and manipulate the contents of an
..mdb file? Even if they do they would be excluded from the second half
of the web page because the Access database is neither open source nor
written in Java.

I think Visual Basic, prior to VB.Net, and Access are significant
contributions to making CRUD applications easy to write and
distribute. However, they do not qualify for a place on
<http://database.profectus.com.au>.

On Mar 16, 1:06 am, "Jim Carlock" <anonym... (AT) 127 (DOT) 0.0.1> wrote:
And you don't see this as a problem?

On Mar 16, 1:06 am, "Jim Carlock" stated ...

"toby" <toby (AT) telegraphics (DOT) com.au> wrote...
: And you don't see this as a problem?

Not really. I don't know what exists for Unix operating systems.
Perhaps someone that works with Unix and Unix databases
knows? Access represents a well crafted beautiful design.

Would you know of a relative database system housed in one file
comparable to Access?

--
Jim Carlock
Post replies to the group.

On Mar 18, 9:24 pm, "Jim Carlock" <anonym... (AT) 127 (DOT) 0.0.1> wrote:
It may not be a problem for the OP's situation - perhaps he knows
they're all Windows laptops.

But in general, the problem is that MS gets to dictate both the
application and the underlying operating system, which, being the tail
wagging the engineering dog, usually leads to suboptimal solutions.

[The way you phrased it also invokes the spectre of monopoly: they
'sell' a database system, a source code control system, a CMS, and so
on -- but if, as you say, they make the real money on the operating
system (which it follows they don't want you to exercise choice in,
and would, pace several adverse antitrust findings, prefer that real
choice did not actually exist), then it tends to explain why these
layered products are often inferior (although Office is reflexively
cited as an exception to this rule).]

SQLite comes to mind, which the OP already knows about.

On Mar 10, 3:51 am, David Segall <d... (AT) address (DOT) invalid> wrote:
Not only for C programs, for Perl and many other languages too.

--
wallace reis

For what I have understood about your requirements I express what
would be my choice: SQLite.
SQLite is in the public domain so, as far as I know, could be used for
any purpose as is specified on its homepage too.
There are many SQLite wrappers for different programming languages
like:
- Java SQLite Wrapper
- ADO.NET 2.0 Provider for SQLite
- pysqlite
Their licenses doesn't add restrictions to an SQLite based solution
and first two wrapper are in the public domain too.
SQLite have powerful features that allow to develop stand-alone
applications with related database without the overhead introduced by
heavy database engines.
Another solution in the open source domain could be PostgreSQL that I
prefer to MySQL for its licensing and, in particular, for its
features.