Re: Access & Scaling

[Don Schenck <schencd%AM_LZCH%VASELL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

::::
::::Forget the number users---how about number of row?!
::::
::::Go throw about 250,000 rows into a table and try to browse it. Result: One
::::big old lazy dog!
::::
::::Access is like the vast majority of other MS products. Nice toys.
::::
::::Wynn
::::
::::BTW, to answer the scaling question, I would say that Access could handle 2
::::users fine, 8...ehhhh...yes but with some hacking & coughing, 15? Only if
::::you like long coffee breaks whilst querying; 3000? We'll never see that in
::::our lifetime!



Interestingly enough, I TRIED this after reading the above message.

I took a table with 104000+ records. I scrolled down for ten seconds. The
results:

AS/400, using Interactive SQL to scroll: 241 records
Access, using a "tableview" to scroll: 2848 records


So I guess it's not Access that is the dog; it's the hardware platform! In this
case, the AS/400 is underpowered. Then again ... it costs how much compared to
the 400MHz NT machine I'm using here?

Point is: do NOT be so quick to dismiss Microsoft's "toys" out-of-hand. You may
have had a bad experience in the past, but IBM and the AS/400 are not the only
platforms that are moving forward in evolution.

Would I want to support 3,000 users with an Access database? No. But would I
need an AS/400 to support eight users for, say, Accounts Payable? No.


Peace,

-- Don Schenck
www.SchenckTech.com

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---