Jim Lawrence
accessd at shaw.ca
Mon Mar 24 18:00:43 CDT 2014
Hi John: Valid numbers but what is the maximum number of people that can really use a bound version of the MDB. I have never seen more than about twenty people (maybe less) and even at times, with that small number, with heavy usage things were really grinding. For the big numbers in data and users, I am still a real ADO fan. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "John W Colby" <jwcolby at gmail.com> To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 3:03:33 PM Subject: Re: [AccessD] Unbound Form Check For Changes >>In all databases the only thing that the desktop needs to manage is changes, deletions and additions. How the back-end handles all that is not a FE concern. That is why the MDB should never be used in place of real database work as it simply does not have the capabilities of a real SQL DB....and needed to have bound data in order to function...it was dead tech as of twenty years ago. Well... Access FE / BE still works just fine for small systems. If you look at the number of companies by employee size, the small companies outnumber the large by a couple of orders of magnitude. https://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html I threw the numbers in a spreadsheet. Out of 5,948,601 total companies, 5,821,277 have under 100 hundred employees. Companies with under 100 employees tend to not have the budget for data centers and development teams. Assuming that the data is correctly partitioned, and of course depending on the total data size, such firms can and often do, easily use MDB back ends. I certainly don't want to start a war here, and I absolutely agree that in most of these cases a set of SQL Server Express BEs are much preferable. However to say that the Access BE is dead is inaccurate to say the least. Even the mention of a SQL Server Express instance often causes panic in the eyes of the very small business owner's eyes. In my view, the panic is not valid but it still often exists. SQL Server simply has a reputation for "high maintenance and high costs". Microsoft hasn't done a good job (IMHO) of selling SQL Server Express into small business. Furthermore for "moving up" from Express, MS' "per core" licensing changes has indeed truly caused massive cost increases relative to the old license system. So I agree that SQL Server Express is MUCH superior to the Access MDB, and yet I also say that the Access DB is perfectly capable in the beginning and for a long time, FOR THE SMALL COMPANY. John W. Colby Reality is what refuses to go away when you do not believe in it On 3/24/2014 5:37 PM, Jim Lawrence wrote: > Hi John: > > Good point but today's reality is that virtually all (or all) data systems are asynchronous. This means unbound. > > By the end of the nineties the whole concept of bounds objects was irrelevant. There just is enough server farms or broadband networking to support bound networks. Bound type databases networks because of this technology are very limited in size and with creation of fully capable ACID databases, unnecessary. > > In all databases the only thing that the desktop needs to manage is changes, deletions and additions. How the back-end handles all that is not a FE concern. That is why the MDB should never be used in place of real database work as it simply does not have the capabilities of a real SQL DB....and needed to have bound data in order to function...it was dead tech as of twenty years ago. > > Love your classes though and as soon as you have a fully function set of MS Access classes that support asynchronous databases count me in. > > Jim > > --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com