Capacity of MS Access 2000

[Denyse]

Could anyone tell me if they have experienced any problems with MS
Access 2000 especially if their database contains over 20,000 records.
I have found that once I have grown the database to over 10,000 Access
starts doing some strange things. For instance, I have a column in my
main table that allows me to place a check mark next to those records
that have been updated. However, now all the check marks have
disappeared. It happened once before and someone told me that MS
Access gets problematic when there are over 10,000 entries on the
system. Is this true and should I simply upgrade to MS Access latest
version or maybe consider another database software. Some response
would be appreciated.

Thanks
Denyse

[Tony Toews]

De********@aol.com (Denyse) wrote:

Could anyone tell me if they have experienced any problems with MS
Access 2000 especially if their database contains over 20,000 records.
I have found that once I have grown the database to over 10,000 Access
starts doing some strange things. For instance, I have a column in my
main table that allows me to place a check mark next to those records
that have been updated. However, now all the check marks have
disappeared. It happened once before and someone told me that MS
Access gets problematic when there are over 10,000 entries on the
system. Is this true and should I simply upgrade to MS Access latest
version or maybe consider another database software.

A client has an A97 MDB which is about 250 Mb in size with at least four tables in
excess of 100,000 or 200,000 records. They have 15-25 users in all day long.

I'd suggest looking elsewhere for problems such as check marks.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

[Peter Russell]

I'll stick my neck out here and say categorically:
Access does NOT 'lose' data!

If you have lost data then this has been due to something done via the
user interface or via code.

You talk about an 'updated' marker. So what happens when you want to
update the records a second time?
10000 records is peanuts to Access, unless you are packing your records
with images and memo fields.

If you are a stand-alone user then upgrading to A2002 maybe worthwhile in
terms of overall reliability.
Alternatively, be sure you have applied the latest service patches to
A2000.

When you compact your database how big is it?

Regards

Peter Russell
Denyse previously wrote:

Could anyone tell me if they have experienced any problems with MS
Access 2000 especially if their database contains over 20,000 records.
I have found that once I have grown the database to over 10,000 Access
starts doing some strange things. For instance, I have a column in my
main table that allows me to place a check mark next to those records
that have been updated. However, now all the check marks have
disappeared. It happened once before and someone told me that MS
Access gets problematic when there are over 10,000 entries on the
system. Is this true and should I simply upgrade to MS Access latest
version or maybe consider another database software. Some response
would be appreciated.

Thanks
Denyse

[David W. Fenton]

De********@aol.com (Denyse) wrote in
<85**************************@posting.google.com >:

Could anyone tell me if they have experienced any problems with MS
Access 2000 especially if their database contains over 20,000
records. I have found that once I have grown the database to over
10,000 Access starts doing some strange things. For instance, I
have a column in my main table that allows me to place a check
mark next to those records that have been updated. However, now
all the check marks have disappeared. It happened once before and
someone told me that MS Access gets problematic when there are
over 10,000 entries on the system. Is this true and should I
simply upgrade to MS Access latest version or maybe consider
another database software. Some response would be appreciated.

Access is not to blame for the lost data.

And I have a client with an A2K application that has 8-12
simultaneous users at all times that has 360K records in the main
table, 450K in the main child table and over 100K in a secondary
child table (along with a number of other tables in the mere 1,000s
of records or less). It performs just great, because it's been
designed to load only a small subset of each table at a time.

Don't believe what you hear from other people -- if someone can't
design a workable Access application with more than 10K records,
then they are completely incompetent not just with Access but
probably with database design in the first place.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Peter Doering]

> Could anyone tell me if they have experienced any problems with MS

Access 2000 especially if their database contains over 20,000 records.

My biggest system is an A97 mdb with ~9.5 million rows spread over 4 linked
tables in 4 different mdb's. It is used for batch-processing, so no users,
but touching all rows everyday (read/add/update/delete). No loss of data so
far.

A2k never had a good reputation re. stability, the main reason why my
clients don't use it ;-). However, I doubt it loosing data.

Peter

--
No mails please.
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.