By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
425,460 Members | 2,215 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 425,460 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

General Design Question SQL Tables or Local Tables

P: n/a
A general design question:
Assuming I can figure out a way to link some local tables in an .MDB
file to my Access2000 .ADP database (any help on this is appreciated
as well), I'm wondering which of the following methods will yield
faster performance over a slow WAN network:

Method A: Creating tables on my SQL Server to store temporary records
that are linked to records in permanent SQL Server tables.

Method B: Linking tables in a seperate .MDB file on the client
workstation that are linked to records in permanent SQL Server tables.

My current .MDB database uses a dozen or so local tables that I write
data to when various forms are loaded to speed up certain functions. I
also store long lists of information on local tables linked to my .MDB
database that populate various combo boxes, such as state names,
country names and city names.

I'm wondering if it will be faster to just store it all on the SQL
Server backend?

Any help is appreciated.
lq
Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
3 Replies


P: n/a
On 30 Oct 2003 04:54:20 -0800, la*************@hotmail.com (Lauren
Quantrell) wrote:

Bad assumption. Keep everything in the SQL Server database, including
temp tables. To avoid multi-user problems, I often add an extra column
to hold the client's machine name.

-Tom.

A general design question:
Assuming I can figure out a way to link some local tables in an .MDB
file to my Access2000 .ADP database


<clip>
Nov 12 '05 #2

P: n/a
Tom,
This method will perform faster over a LAN/WAN then holding tables
locally?
On my MDBs I have always stored large tables locally (these tables
populate combo boxes and don't change often or ever.)
lq
Tom van Stiphout <to*****@no.spam.cox.net> wrote in message news:<ig********************************@4ax.com>. ..
On 30 Oct 2003 04:54:20 -0800, la*************@hotmail.com (Lauren
Quantrell) wrote:

Bad assumption. Keep everything in the SQL Server database, including
temp tables. To avoid multi-user problems, I often add an extra column
to hold the client's machine name.

-Tom.

A general design question:
Assuming I can figure out a way to link some local tables in an .MDB
file to my Access2000 .ADP database


<clip>

Nov 12 '05 #3

P: n/a
On 30 Oct 2003 11:52:32 -0800, la*************@hotmail.com (Lauren
Quantrell) wrote:

I meant to say that in an ADP you can't have local tables.
-Tom.

Tom,
This method will perform faster over a LAN/WAN then holding tables
locally?
On my MDBs I have always stored large tables locally (these tables
populate combo boxes and don't change often or ever.)
lq
Tom van Stiphout <to*****@no.spam.cox.net> wrote in message news:<ig********************************@4ax.com>. ..
On 30 Oct 2003 04:54:20 -0800, la*************@hotmail.com (Lauren
Quantrell) wrote:

Bad assumption. Keep everything in the SQL Server database, including
temp tables. To avoid multi-user problems, I often add an extra column
to hold the client's machine name.

-Tom.

>A general design question:
>Assuming I can figure out a way to link some local tables in an .MDB
>file to my Access2000 .ADP database


<clip>


Nov 12 '05 #4

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.