8/9/2019 Capacidad de MSAccess
1/2
MS-Access no soporta triggersMS-Access vias ODBC no soporta
cursoresF.P.
De: Dr. Gerald Stinger Guala
[[email protected]]Enviado: Thursday, January 17, 2002
12:22 AMPara: [email protected]: Re: Database - summary
The MSAccess simultaneous users problem on the web is
averted in part by usinga dsnless connection to your ASPs (and
resetting the timeoutsetting) so that the server creates a separate
session for each user query, then the number of users is just
a function of CPU resources allocated. I agree though and we will
probably eventually move to SQL as well eventually for a few other
reasons. It's only money.
I too have looked at Biolink a few times and I spoke to Steve
Shattuck about itat the TDWG meetings in Sydney a few months ago.
It should eventually be reallygood. Unfortunately, there is
currently no good way to handle multiformat (or any) image serving
to the web and there are only really the most rudimentary
plans for such "someday" was my understanding from him. Thus,
given that we run several graphics dependant databases, it just
won't work for us.
Stinger
Gerald "Stinger" Guala, Ph.D.Keeper of the HerbariumFairchild
Tropical Garden Research Center11935 Old Cutler Rd.Coral Gables, FL
33156-4299
www.virtualherbarium.org
-----Original Message-----From: Taxacom Discussion List
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Richard Pyl
eSent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 5:57 PMTo:
[email protected]: Re: Database - summary
> MS Access is the most popular database software (be
careful, Access> should not be used for larger databases. For
example, Willoughby Ass.>
http://www.willo.com/cgi/content.cgi?main.html,snap.html,intro_lef>
t,snap.html,intro_right recommend only 60.000 objects for their>
Access-based database SNAP!)
Access 2000 can handle files up to 2GB in size. I've been able
to successfully d
evelop databases entirely within MS Access for up to about a
quarter-million taxon "assertion" records -- linking 66K taxon
names to 20K Reference citaions, alongside 40K collection objects
and 10K records of people and organizations (all-told involving
about 60 linked tables) -- all within a single file less than
200MB. It operates amazingly well on a single-processor, 366Mhz
Pentium laptop. When you consider that nearly half the file
size is made up by about 50 embedded hi-res images (which would
best not be embedded), and even then we're only talking10% of
Access' capacity, I think it's safe to say that file size is not
the main limiting factor. Databases with >>60K records
are routinly handled with ease by Access, provided the system was
designed and coded well.
8/9/2019 Capacidad de MSAccess
2/2
The real limitation that I've encountered in Access is with
respect to the number of simultaneous concurrent users. Who you
should believe for "actual" numberof simultaneous concurrent users
that Access can support depends on a lot of factors, but we've
generally had success with up to about 5 or 6 -- but mini-crashes
(e.g., individual record locks crappingout) crop up from time to
time, even with a half-dozen users. For this reason,we are moving
in the direction of SQLServer with Access front-ends to handle most
of our in-house DB development needs. Incidentally, we are also
evaluating BioLink at the moment for our Botany collection. So far,
we're very encouraged. It seems to have the right combination of
well-developed schema, good user interface tools, and direct access
to data due to its SQL Server platform.
Una Smith wrote:
P.S. Just read this:
> As for the assertion that you should not use Access for
large> databases, this is pure propaganda that was once true but
is now> outdated and unfortunately maintained by Oracle and its
affectionados.> I have one database with 180,000 records in it
that runs fine in> Access2000. The limit is around 2 gigabytes
for the size of the mdb> file. That would be 3.6 million records
in my herbarium database. Then
> you can export to SQL automatically - unlike a lot of MS
software, it> actually works, I've tried it.>> Stinger
It's not just Oracle affectionados -- I've heard the same
erroneous propaganda coming out of FoxPro diehards as well. The
Oracle part I can understand, given Larry Ellison's feelings about
Bill Gates....but FoxPro is now owned by MS, so I'm not sure what
fuels that fire. This is not to say that certain aspects of Oracle
and/or FoxPro aren't superior to Jet 4.0 or SQLServer....but when
the anti-Access crowd resorts to false information to make their
case, it's a bit disturbing.
Richard L. PyleIchthyology, Bishop Museum1525 Bernice St.,
Honolulu, HI 96817Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252email:
[email protected]
http://www.bishopmuseum.org/bishop/HBS/pylerichard.html"The views
expressed are not necessarily those of Bishop Museum."
