By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
432,510 Members | 1,810 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 432,510 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Any real need to go from DAO to ADO?

P: n/a
I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet
backend to SQL Server 2000.
It uses linked tables and DAO exclusively.
It's working fine.
Sooner or later, the front end will need to go to A2003 or whatever,
which I asssume won't be too much of a problem.
Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
A2003?
I can't see any justification at the moment.

Terry Bell

Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
9 Replies


P: n/a
<dr**********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet
backend to SQL Server 2000.
It uses linked tables and DAO exclusively.
It's working fine.
Sooner or later, the front end will need to go to A2003 or whatever,
which I asssume won't be too much of a problem.
Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
A2003?
I can't see any justification at the moment.


The oft-posted claim is that while DAO is superior against Jet data, ADO is
faster when used against any other back end. I don't doubt the accuracy of that
claim, but my problem with it is that I go looking for more speed in those
places where I see a lack of it and I have never seen any performance problems
with anything I do with DAO against either SQL Server or UDB400 back ends.

Changing anything would involve setting up loop tests to see how many
milliseconds I might shave by re-writing some process with ADO and I just find
no justification for doing that. I suppose when my apps are so perfect and
feature-rich that my users have stopped asking for enhancements that I could
then engage in such efforts (just because). For now I have bigger fish to fry.
--
I don't check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com

Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
Rick Brandt wrote:
For now I have bigger fish to fry.


A Codd right?

--
[OO=00=OO]
Nov 13 '05 #3

P: n/a
There are many things that ADO does that DAO does not.
There are several things that ADO does better than DAO.
Is this enough to justify the conversion of an existing application
that works well? I think it is not.
But for a new project I would always use ADO as exclusively as Access
permits, unless I could use something both newer and better.

Nov 13 '05 #4

P: n/a
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 17:51:30 +0100, Trevor Best <no****@besty.org.uk> wrote:
Rick Brandt wrote:
For now I have bigger fish to fry.


A Codd right?


Boooo <g>
Nov 13 '05 #5

P: n/a
On 19 Jun 2005 05:56:47 -0700, dr**********@hotmail.com wrote:
I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet
backend to SQL Server 2000.
It uses linked tables and DAO exclusively.
It's working fine.
Sooner or later, the front end will need to go to A2003 or whatever,
which I asssume won't be too much of a problem.
Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
A2003?
I can't see any justification at the moment.

Terry Bell


My policy has always been to use DAO exclusively in Access applications and
ADO in non-Access VB/VBA applications by default, and use the alternative
library as well only for things that it provides a specific benefit for.

The reason for this is that Access MDBs (and you probably don't want to use
ADPs) always use DAO for recordsets behind forms anyway, so I'll end up with
some support code specifically for working with those recordsets. I find it
redundant to then have support code for working with ADO as well. Also, there
are places where bouncing between DAO and ADO can cause trouble, such as where
the "Like" operator is used.
Nov 13 '05 #6

P: n/a
dr**********@hotmail.com wrote:
I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
A2003?


? Does A97 support ADO? I didn't think it did.

--
Tim http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~tmarshal/
^o<
/#) "Burp-beep, burp-beep, burp-beep?" - Quaker Jake
/^^ "Whatcha doin?" - Ditto "TIM-MAY!!" - Me
Nov 13 '05 #7

P: n/a
There is no default ADO reference in A97, but you can certainly add such a
reference.
A97 lacks certain objects, such as CurrentProject, so it's pretty much
impossible to use ADO to connect to data in the current database, but since
the OP says he has migrated his data to SQL Server, that wouldn't be an
issue here.

HTH

"Tim Marshall" <TI****@PurplePandaChasers.Moertherium> wrote in message
news:d9**********@coranto.ucs.mun.ca...
dr**********@hotmail.com wrote:
I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from a Jet

Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it goes to
A2003?


? Does A97 support ADO? I didn't think it did.

--
Tim http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~tmarshal/
^o<
/#) "Burp-beep, burp-beep, burp-beep?" - Quaker Jake
/^^ "Whatcha doin?" - Ditto "TIM-MAY!!" - Me

Nov 13 '05 #8

P: n/a
"ly******@yahoo.ca" <ly******@yahoo.ca> wrote in
news:11*********************@o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com:
There are many things that ADO does that DAO does not.
A list of "many" things would be very helpful. I know of only two or
three.
There are several things that ADO does better than DAO.
I would have thought there were many things that ADO does better
than DAO, especially with SQL Server, but a list would be handy.
Is this enough to justify the conversion of an existing
application that works well? I think it is not.
But for a new project I would always use ADO as exclusively as
Access permits, unless I could use something both newer and
better.


If I were developing a new Access app to run against SQL Server, I'd
choose ADO as my default data access method.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #9

P: n/a
Tim Marshall <TI****@PurplePandaChasers.Moertherium> wrote in
news:d9**********@coranto.ucs.mun.ca:
dr**********@hotmail.com wrote:
I have recently completed upsizing a large Access 97 system from
a Jet

Would there be any advantage converting to ADO, now, or when it
goes to A2003?


? Does A97 support ADO? I didn't think it did.


Yes. It's just not integrated into Access as it is from A2K on.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #10

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.