I recently had a Microsoft Access 97 database corrupt on me. The
setup is a split database (front end/back end) setup with about 10-15
users. This is the first corruption in something like a year. The
database has about 25 tables, and the total size is about 15MB, after
a compact. The front end sits on users Windows 2000 Professional
desktops, and the file server is a Windows 2000 Server.
I've been thinking of migrating the back end, but because of cost,
I've been thinking about using MySQL ( www.mysql.com) and using linked
ODBC tables from within the front end.
I have a few questions..
It is my understanding that when an Access97 front end queries an
Access backend, it really just pulls all of the needed data accross
the network, runs the query, and displays what is needed. For
example, if I had a table EMPLOYEE(ID, NAME) and I ran the query:
SELECT ID FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE NAME = "John Doe"
The front end would get ALL of the rows from EMPLOYEE via the network,
and then perform the SELECT. Is my understanding correct?
Secondly, if I am correct, will using MySQL stop this from happening
if I use linked ODBC tables? I'd rather not rewrite the entire front
end to use ADO.
Thoughts?
--
Mike Loll 10  2381 
Mike,
On 20 Nov 2003 07:06:28 -0800, mi*********@hot mail.com (Mike) wrote in
comp.databases. ms-access: I've been thinking of migrating the back end, but because of cost,
I've been thinking about using MySQL (www.mysql.com) and using linked
ODBC tables from within the front end.
I have a few questions..
It is my understanding that when an Access97 front end queries an
Access backend, it really just pulls all of the needed data accross
the network, runs the query, and displays what is needed. For
example, if I had a table EMPLOYEE(ID, NAME) and I ran the query:
SELECT ID FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE NAME = "John Doe"
The front end would get ALL of the rows from EMPLOYEE via the network,
and then perform the SELECT. Is my understanding correct?
Yes, kind of.
Although JEt does need to pull 100% of what it needs over the wire,
and absolutely no processing occurs on the file server, what jet needs
is not at all the complete set of rows from your table. Your table is
presumably indexed. Jet will check the table definition, find the
applicable index definitions, bring over the necessary index pages
(which does not at all mean all index pages), find the location of the
appropriate data page(s) with the target data, then bring back those
small data pages that contain your desired records. The result is a
lot less i/o than you might think, but still, 100% of the data
processing occurs on each and every client pc that uses the db - not
on the file server.
Secondly, if I am correct, will using MySQL stop this from happening
if I use linked ODBC tables? I'd rather not rewrite the entire front
end to use ADO.
In your example case, yes, all the work is done by mysql on the
server, and only the correct rows returned over the wire.
But that said, there are cases where jet will pull down much more
data, even from a server rdbms. For instance, if you attempted to
draw data from a query that referenced two tables, one on the mysql
server and one local, or on from a different rdbms, then Jet has to
resolve the query, and mysql can't do all the work for you. In a case
like that, it's back to a similar scenario as a jet-only
implementation.
But in general, a server rdbms will serve you well, and mysql is fine.
A lot of people prefer postgresql (I'm one of them) because the
feature set is more comprehensive, but it all depends what your needs
are. For large dataset olap type projects, mysql has an edge over
postgresql. For full service needs, and as a general replacement for
jet across the board, postgresql is better.
Peter Miller
_______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
PK Solutions -- Data Recovery for Microsoft Access/Jet/SQL
Free quotes, Guaranteed lowest prices and best results www.pksolutions.com 1.866.FILE.FIX 1.760.476.9051
> But in general, a server rdbms will serve you well, and mysql is fine. A lot of people prefer postgresql (I'm one of them) because the
feature set is more comprehensive, but it all depends what your needs
are. For large dataset olap type projects, mysql has an edge over
postgresql. For full service needs, and as a general replacement for
jet across the board, postgresql is better.
What's the status of postgresql on win32? Is it stable? The reason I
ask is because I read the win32 faq on the web site and they listed
some things with running it under cygwin about pipes being insecure or
something. Do you use in for production work on win32?
--
Mike mi*********@hot mail.com
On 20 Nov 2003 19:09:27 -0800, mi*********@hot mail.com (Mike) wrote in
comp.databases. ms-access: What's the status of postgresql on win32? Is it stable? The reason I
ask is because I read the win32 faq on the web site and they listed
some things with running it under cygwin about pipes being insecure or
something. Do you use in for production work on win32?
No. I run postgresql from a linux box. Cygwin's fine for a
development machine, but I don't like suggesting it as a requirement
for a production environment.
Peter Miller
_______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
PK Solutions -- Data Recovery for Microsoft Access/Jet/SQL
Free quotes, Guaranteed lowest prices and best results www.pksolutions.com 1.866.FILE.FIX 1.760.476.9051
On 20 Nov 2003 07:06:28 -0800, mi*********@hot mail.com (Mike) wrote: I recently had a Microsoft Access 97 database corrupt on me. The
setup is a split database (front end/back end) setup with about 10-15
users. This is the first corruption in something like a year. The
database has about 25 tables, and the total size is about 15MB, after
a compact. The front end sits on users Windows 2000 Professional
desktops, and the file server is a Windows 2000 Server.
I've been thinking of migrating the back end, but because of cost,
I've been thinking about using MySQL (www.mysql.com) and using linked
ODBC tables from within the front end.
I have a few questions..
It is my understanding that when an Access97 front end queries an
Access backend, it really just pulls all of the needed data accross
the network, runs the query, and displays what is needed. For
example, if I had a table EMPLOYEE(ID, NAME) and I ran the query:
SELECT ID FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE NAME = "John Doe"
The front end would get ALL of the rows from EMPLOYEE via the network,
and then perform the SELECT. Is my understanding correct?
Secondly, if I am correct, will using MySQL stop this from happening
if I use linked ODBC tables? I'd rather not rewrite the entire front
end to use ADO.
Thoughts?
To add to what Peter said, I've been told that Interbase makes a wonderful
server back-end for Access, and is much easier to administer than PostgreSQL,
though I have yet to try it personally. Unlike PostgreSQL, it can run in
native Windows (PostgreSQL will do that soon I'm told, but not yet), and it
has a more complete ANSI SQL implementation than MySQL. There is another fork
of Interbase called Firebird you might also want to look into. Interbase and
Firebird are both free.
Having set up PostgreSQL on Windows before, I'll say that it is not for the
faint of heart, and although it can be made secure on Windows, that takes much
more work.
Interbase/Firebird is an excellent server. Interbase is Borland's
commercial version, and Firebird is the Open Source free version. A lot of
the problems with the original Interbase were fixed with Firebird, and it is
under active development. It provides much the same functionallity as
MSDE/SQL Server such as views, referential integrity, etc.. Check it out.
Ruben Baumann
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message
news:kd******** *************** *********@4ax.c om... On 20 Nov 2003 07:06:28 -0800, mi*********@hot mail.com (Mike) wrote:
I recently had a Microsoft Access 97 database corrupt on me. The
setup is a split database (front end/back end) setup with about 10-15
users. This is the first corruption in something like a year. The
database has about 25 tables, and the total size is about 15MB, after
a compact. The front end sits on users Windows 2000 Professional
desktops, and the file server is a Windows 2000 Server.
I've been thinking of migrating the back end, but because of cost,
I've been thinking about using MySQL (www.mysql.com) and using linked
ODBC tables from within the front end.
I have a few questions..
It is my understanding that when an Access97 front end queries an
Access backend, it really just pulls all of the needed data accross
the network, runs the query, and displays what is needed. For
example, if I had a table EMPLOYEE(ID, NAME) and I ran the query:
SELECT ID FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE NAME = "John Doe"
The front end would get ALL of the rows from EMPLOYEE via the network,
and then perform the SELECT. Is my understanding correct?
Secondly, if I am correct, will using MySQL stop this from happening
if I use linked ODBC tables? I'd rather not rewrite the entire front
end to use ADO.
Thoughts?
To add to what Peter said, I've been told that Interbase makes a wonderful
server back-end for Access, and is much easier to administer than
PostgreSQL, though I have yet to try it personally. Unlike PostgreSQL, it can run in
native Windows (PostgreSQL will do that soon I'm told, but not yet), and
it has a more complete ANSI SQL implementation than MySQL. There is another
fork of Interbase called Firebird you might also want to look into. Interbase
and Firebird are both free.
Having set up PostgreSQL on Windows before, I'll say that it is not for
the faint of heart, and although it can be made secure on Windows, that takes
much more work.
I was under the impression that Interbase had been open sourced first, and
that's how Firebird was possible as an open source derivative.
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:26:10 -0800, "R Baumann" <ry**@9yahoo.co m> wrote: Interbase/Firebird is an excellent server. Interbase is Borland's
commercial version, and Firebird is the Open Source free version. A lot of
the problems with the original Interbase were fixed with Firebird, and it is
under active development. It provides much the same functionallity as
MSDE/SQL Server such as views, referential integrity, etc.. Check it out.
Ruben Baumann
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message
news:kd******* *************** **********@4ax. com... On 20 Nov 2003 07:06:28 -0800, mi*********@hot mail.com (Mike) wrote:
>I recently had a Microsoft Access 97 database corrupt on me. The
>setup is a split database (front end/back end) setup with about 10-15
>users. This is the first corruption in something like a year. The
>database has about 25 tables, and the total size is about 15MB, after
>a compact. The front end sits on users Windows 2000 Professional
>desktops, and the file server is a Windows 2000 Server.
>
>I've been thinking of migrating the back end, but because of cost,
>I've been thinking about using MySQL (www.mysql.com) and using linked
>ODBC tables from within the front end.
>
>I have a few questions..
>
>It is my understanding that when an Access97 front end queries an
>Access backend, it really just pulls all of the needed data accross
>the network, runs the query, and displays what is needed. For
>example, if I had a table EMPLOYEE(ID, NAME) and I ran the query:
>
>SELECT ID FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE NAME = "John Doe"
>
>The front end would get ALL of the rows from EMPLOYEE via the network,
>and then perform the SELECT. Is my understanding correct?
>
>Secondly, if I am correct, will using MySQL stop this from happening
>if I use linked ODBC tables? I'd rather not rewrite the entire front
>end to use ADO.
>
>Thoughts?
To add to what Peter said, I've been told that Interbase makes a wonderful
server back-end for Access, and is much easier to administer than
PostgreSQL, though I have yet to try it personally. Unlike PostgreSQL, it can run in
native Windows (PostgreSQL will do that soon I'm told, but not yet), and
it has a more complete ANSI SQL implementation than MySQL. There is another
fork of Interbase called Firebird you might also want to look into. Interbase
and Firebird are both free.
Having set up PostgreSQL on Windows before, I'll say that it is not for
the faint of heart, and although it can be made secure on Windows, that takes
much more work.
Your absolutely right Steve. Sorry if my post gave a wrong impression.
Following is a couple of paragraphs from the Firebird website: http://www.ibphoenix.com
Introduction to Firebird
In August 2000, Borland Software Corp. (formerly known as Inprise)
released the beta version of InterBase 6.0 as open source. The community of
waiting developers and users preferred to establish itself as an
independent, self-regulating team rather than submit to the risks,
conditions and restrictions that the company proposed for community
participation in open source development. A core of developers quickly
formed a project and installed its own source tree on SourceForge. They
liked the Phoenix logo which was to have been ISC's brandmark and adopted
the name "Firebird" for the project.
Because Borland's open source efforts regarding InterBase never really
took off beyond prime release of the source code and the company returned
its focus to closed commercial development, Firebird became THE Open Source
version of InterBase.
For more information, please see the Firebird(IBPhoe nix) site.
Firebird doesn't get a lot of press as opposed to Oracle, SQL Server, My
SQL, or PostgreSQL, but it's just as good, and in the case of MySQL, it
already has what MySQL is just now implementing; referential integrity,
triggers, sub-selects, etc.
HTH
Ruben
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message
news:0s******** *************** *********@4ax.c om... I was under the impression that Interbase had been open sourced first, and
that's how Firebird was possible as an open source derivative.
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:26:10 -0800, "R Baumann" <ry**@9yahoo.co m> wrote:
Interbase/Firebird is an excellent server. Interbase is Borland's
commercial version, and Firebird is the Open Source free version. A lot
ofthe problems with the original Interbase were fixed with Firebird, and it
isunder active development. It provides much the same functionallity as
MSDE/SQL Server such as views, referential integrity, etc.. Check it
out.
Ruben Baumann
"Steve Jorgensen" <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote in message
news:kd******* *************** **********@4ax. com... On 20 Nov 2003 07:06:28 -0800, mi*********@hot mail.com (Mike) wrote:
>I recently had a Microsoft Access 97 database corrupt on me. The
>setup is a split database (front end/back end) setup with about 10-15
>users. This is the first corruption in something like a year. The
>database has about 25 tables, and the total size is about 15MB, after
>a compact. The front end sits on users Windows 2000 Professional
>desktops, and the file server is a Windows 2000 Server.
>
>I've been thinking of migrating the back end, but because of cost,
>I've been thinking about using MySQL (www.mysql.com) and using linked
>ODBC tables from within the front end.
>
>I have a few questions..
>
>It is my understanding that when an Access97 front end queries an
>Access backend, it really just pulls all of the needed data accross
>the network, runs the query, and displays what is needed. For
>example, if I had a table EMPLOYEE(ID, NAME) and I ran the query:
>
>SELECT ID FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE NAME = "John Doe"
>
>The front end would get ALL of the rows from EMPLOYEE via the network,
>and then perform the SELECT. Is my understanding correct?
>
>Secondly, if I am correct, will using MySQL stop this from happening
>if I use linked ODBC tables? I'd rather not rewrite the entire front
>end to use ADO.
>
>Thoughts?
To add to what Peter said, I've been told that Interbase makes a
wonderful server back-end for Access, and is much easier to administer than
PostgreSQL, though I have yet to try it personally. Unlike PostgreSQL, it can run
in native Windows (PostgreSQL will do that soon I'm told, but not yet),
andit has a more complete ANSI SQL implementation than MySQL. There is
anotherfork of Interbase called Firebird you might also want to look into.
Interbaseand Firebird are both free.
Having set up PostgreSQL on Windows before, I'll say that it is not for
the faint of heart, and although it can be made secure on Windows, that
takesmuch more work.
"Peter Miller" wrote No. I run postgresql from a linux box.
Cygwin's fine for a development machine,
but I don't like suggesting it as a requirement
for a production environment.
Does anyone keep up with PostgreSQL enough to know the status of the native
Windows version that was under development? I thought it would be available
by now.
Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 00:10:35 GMT, "Larry Linson"
<bo*****@localh ost.not> wrote in comp.databases. ms-access: "Peter Miller" wrote
No. I run postgresql from a linux box.
Cygwin's fine for a development machine,
but I don't like suggesting it as a requirement
for a production environment.
Does anyone keep up with PostgreSQL enough to know the status of the native
Windows version that was under development? I thought it would be available
by now.
As I mentioned, I run it from a linux box. I don't know about
progress on a native windows version. I think, as with several other
projects, there's mixed feeling on this by the developers. A native
version would obviously placate those who are unhappy running cygwin
on Windows (as another layer), but it also takes extra resources when
a viable solution for windows already exists. Personally, I don't
know where I fall on this, but I understand projects that make the
'native vs cygwin' decision a second-tier concern.
Peter Miller
_______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
PK Solutions -- Data Recovery for Microsoft Access/Jet/SQL
Free quotes, Guaranteed lowest prices and best results www.pksolutions.com 1.866.FILE.FIX 1.760.476.9051 This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Richard Gabriel |
last post by:
Hi everyone,
Since we upgraded to MySQL 4.0.13 from 3.23, we have been getting table
corruption often. It happens about twice per week (with about 500
queries per second average). I have even set up a cron to run
mysqlcheck every hour to try to do some damage control. The biggest
problem is that once the table is corrupted, it seems to...
|
by: Jason McCormick |
last post by:
Hello all,
Sorry to post this again, but I go not response and was really hoping
someone can help me as this is a mission-critical problem. I have 3
slave MySQL servers (4.0.13) replicating from a master machine
(4.0.13). The master machine is running only MySQL while the slave
machines are an Apache + Tomcat + MySQL web service. All...
|
by: Craig Stadler |
last post by:
mySQL (4.0.20a win32), dual amd2200 machine, 4 gigs of DDR ECC memory.
I have a series of 33 tables, identical in structure : (field names
shortened)
CREATE TABLE `dbtable1` (
`FS` varchar(254) NOT NULL default '',
`NAM` varchar(254) NOT NULL default '',
`H` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`SIZ` int(11) default NULL,
|
by: lkrubner |
last post by:
An old friend of mine recently approached me and said something like:
"I've a computer at my office that has an Access database running on
it. We've most of our company info in there. We'd like to put a portion
of it online as a dynamic site, but we don't want the database to leave
our office. Our office is connected to the Internet through a...
|
by: ship |
last post by:
Hi
We need some advice: We are thinking of upgrading our Access database
from Access 2000 to Access 2004.
How stable is MS Office 2003? (particularly Access 2003).
We are just a small company and this is a big decision for us(!) It's
not just the money it's committing to an new version of Access!
| | |
by: Ian Baker |
last post by:
We have developed an Access/Jet database (2000, XP & 2003 versions) that has
been used by clients all around the world for several years and is extremely
robust with 55 tables, 172 hard stored queries (plus about the same in VBA
SQL code), 60 forms and about 18,000 lines of code. The biggest advantage
with Access is that it doesn't cost the...
|
by: Mell via AccessMonster.com |
last post by:
I created databases on Access 2003 and I want to deploy them to users. My
code was also done using 2003.
If they have Ms Access 2000 or higher, will they be able to use these dbs
with all code, etc?
Please explain
--
Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com
|
by: Owen Jenkins |
last post by:
Following on from an earlier post...
I can reliably corrupt a record by doing the following ...
Open two separate but identical front ends on one PC each linking to the
same back end.
Edit a records in one front end and leave it unsaved.
Edit the same record in the other front end and save the change.
Save the change in the first front...
|
by: suzanne |
last post by:
I have a database that had been stable until 3 weeks ago. The Access
2003 database occasionally (a couple of times a week) gets corrupted
when the last user exits the application. At least, that's what I'm
assuming since they get no error while working.
If I make a copy of the database prior to the last user logging out,
that copied DB...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed.
This is as boiled down as I can make it. ...
| | |
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the...
|
by: conductexam |
last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one.
At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
|
by: muto222 |
last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
| | |
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating...
| |
