[AccessD] SQL vs Access

Databases are backed up while people are using them all of the time.  Big
transactional databases are never inactive so you have to be able to backup
when people are in them.

The problem with an Access database is that it is a file backend, not a
server be.  When people are in it the file is locked.  In the past this
prevented it from being backed up, though I do not think that is true
anymore (with shadow copy stuff).  In any case, IT sees this as a regular
file, that has to be backed up with a regular "file be backup software", and
restored the same way.  They think that it cannot be backed up if people are
in it.  With access, that means if anyone did not get out of the database at
night which happens a LOT.

In any event, it is probably a losing battle.  IT has a system, they do not
want to go creating outboard databases that they have to worry about.  They
want the Be to be a database on one of the servers which is already set up
to be backed up.

John W. Colby
Colby Consulting
www.ColbyConsulting.com 
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Tina Norris
Fields
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 10:59 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] SQL vs Access

Drew,
I'm so glad you said that.  I kept thinking it, but didn't say it.  Why ARE
they backing it up when people are using it?  Rocky, do you know the answer
to that?  Just curious.  Not smart enough to really contribute to the
discussion, but curious enough to follow it and ask questions.
Tina


Drew Wutka wrote:
> If they are backing up when people are using the system, that's bad 
> planning, unless your app needs to be running 24/7.  Also, corruption 
> is usually due to a bad network connection.
>
> However, you're fighting an uphill battle with IT with SQL vs. Access.
> Just charge them more and develop it for SQL Server.
>
> Drew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Rocky 
> Smolin at Beach Access Software
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 10:50 AM
> To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
> Subject: [AccessD] SQL vs Access
>
> Dear List:
>  
> I am looking at doing a job which is ideal for an Access back end 
> (IMO) but IT would prefer a SQL back end for the reasons below.  I 
> expressed the opinion that SQL would be overkill.  But they are 
> concerned about stability and backup.
>  
> How do I respond to this? Does he have a valid point?  The database 
> will have a relatively small amount of data and 4 initially and 
> eventually up to 10 users.  Light entry and update.
>  
> **********************************************************
>
> I think his response about it being overkill is from the perspective 
> that it is a small application which normally wouldn't warrant a MS 
> SQL license and overhead.  Because we already have several servers, we 
> would not require any additional licenses.  The real reason we would 
> like the MS SQL backend is for stability and backup purposes.  We 
> cannot backup an Access database the same way we can MS SQL because it 
> is simply a flat file and can sometimes not properly backup if the 
> file is currently in use (which will be the majority of the time).  
> Additionally, in the past we have had problems with corrupt MS Access 
> databases when multiple people are accessing it simultaneously.  I 
> think it would be valuable to have him quote the project if it were 
> done only in MS Access and the side-by-side comparison of the same 
> project with the MS SQL backend.  Please let me know if you need 
> further assistance in talking to Rocky about this.
>
> ******************************************
>
>  
> MTIA
>  
> Rocky'
>  
>   
--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com