Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single "asp_net
worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous human
users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single user.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database
backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous
change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
any way?
12  2181 
You got it...
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================
"Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote in message news:uX**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single "asp_net
worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous human
users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single user.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database
backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous
change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
any way?
Dan V. wrote: Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single
"asp_net worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50
simultaneous human users of the website would appear to the database
backend as a single user.
No. Multiple connections will be made. Yes, they will be made by the same
user, but that does not decrease the number of connections made. Each
connection contains its own session.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access
(actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET
website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous change to make while
NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in any way?
I don't follow you. In your first statement, you seem to be arguing (albeit
based on a flawed premise) in favor of retaining your Access backend ...
Bob Barrows
--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
I understood his post as requesting confirmation for his impression
that replacing his Access database with an MSDE database would
increase his his website's capacity to serve customers, since MSDE
doesn't choke on 50 simultaneous connections while Access might.
I agree with that.
Whether it's 50 simultaneous users each requesting a connection,
or one user requesting 50 connections is immaterial to the end result :
At some point, Access will choke while MSDE will continue to chug along.
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================
"Bob Barrows [MVP]" <re******@NOyahoo.SPAMcom> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... Dan V. wrote: Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single
"asp_net worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50
simultaneous human users of the website would appear to the database
backend as a single user.
No. Multiple connections will be made. Yes, they will be made by the same
user, but that does not decrease the number of connections made. Each
connection contains its own session.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access
(actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET
website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous change to make while
NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in any way?
I don't follow you. In your first statement, you seem to be arguing (albeit
based on a flawed premise) in favor of retaining your Access backend ...
Bob Barrows
--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
I am saying we would switch to MSDE if it was faster - I thought it was
clear... :) Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access
(actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET
website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous change to make while
NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in any way?
"Bob Barrows [MVP]" <re******@NOyahoo.SPAMcom> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... Dan V. wrote: Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single
"asp_net worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50
simultaneous human users of the website would appear to the database
backend as a single user.
No. Multiple connections will be made. Yes, they will be made by the same
user, but that does not decrease the number of connections made. Each
connection contains its own session.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access
(actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET
website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous change to make while
NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in any way?
I don't follow you. In your first statement, you seem to be arguing
(albeit based on a flawed premise) in favor of retaining your Access backend ...
Bob Barrows
--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
Juan T. Llibre wrote: I understood his post as requesting confirmation for his impression
that replacing his Access database with an MSDE database would
increase his his website's capacity to serve customers, since MSDE
doesn't choke on 50 simultaneous connections while Access might.
I agree with that.
Same here - while I have read about an application where careful coding and
connection-handling allowed Access to adequately handle 200 users, MSDE
would probably have done the job better.
Whether it's 50 simultaneous users each requesting a connection,
or one user requesting 50 connections is immaterial to the end result
:
At some point, Access will choke while MSDE will continue to chug
along.
Again, careful connection-handling might allow Access to chug along as well
as MSDE. Don't forget about the thread-governor in MSDE ...
Bob Barrows
--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
I know, but the first sentence muddied the waters ...
I agree that MSDE should be used. Again, while it is possible to manage your
connections so that Access will perform well under this user load, MSDE will
be more forgiving if you get sloppy ... with Access, one connection left
open too long will bring things to a screeching halt. You have to do things
exactly right to make Access work well in these copnditions, as well as
making the proper sacrifices (virgin calves only) ... ;-)
Bob
Dan V. wrote: I am saying we would switch to MSDE if it was faster - I thought it
was clear... :)
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access
(actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET
website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous change to make while
NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in any way?
--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:22:40 -0400, "Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote:
¤ Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single "asp_net
¤ worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous human
¤ users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single user.
¤ Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database
¤ backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous
¤ change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
¤ any way?
¤
As Bob mentioned in one of his posts you may want to keep in mind the that MSDE has a Workload
Governor that will throttle connections when there are more than eight concurrent operations. This
could perceptibly affect performance when using MSDE.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Like all versions of SQL Server 2000, SQL Server 2000 Personal Edition
and MSDE 2000 allow 32,767 connections to an instance of the database
engine.
There is no limit for the number of connections that can be executing operations
at the same time. The only effect of the workload governor is that it starts slowing
down the database engine when more than eight operations are actively running
at the same time.
Once it has been activated, the workload governor limits performance by stalling
a user connection for a few milliseconds each time the connection requests a logical
read or write on any of the pages in the data files of a database.
(The governor does not affect log files.)
The database engine waits before every data page reference as long as there
are more than eight active concurrent operations. When the number of active
operations is eight or lower, the database engine does not wait before scheduling
any reads or writes.
50 simultaneous users does *not* equal 50 simultaneous connections.
Users do *not* request database operations at all times they are connected.
Some time is spent reading the results, too, which downlevels
the number of connections being accessed simultaneously.
A few milliseconds delay for an MSDE read/write operation is negligible,
and *no* read/write operation will be denied.
In any case, performance will be better for an MSDE database
than for an Access database when users are approximately 50.
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================
"Paul Clement" <Us***********************@swspectrum.com> wrote in message
news:3l********************************@4ax.com... On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:22:40 -0400, "Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote:
¤ Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single "asp_net
¤ worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous human
¤ users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single user.
¤ Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database
¤ backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous
¤ change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
¤ any way?
¤
As Bob mentioned in one of his posts you may want to keep in mind the that MSDE has a
Workload
Governor that will throttle connections when there are more than eight concurrent
operations. This
could perceptibly affect performance when using MSDE.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Hi Dan:
In addition to the other good advice, I'll point out the moving to
MSDE now will put you in an easier position to move to SQL 2005
Express when it ships. There is no workload governor in 2005 and the
feature set compared to Access is even greater.
--
Scott http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:22:40 -0400, "Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote: Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single "asp_net
worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous human
users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single user.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database
backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous
change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
any way?
Thanks for this excellent informative post.
"Juan T. Llibre" <no***********@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:eN**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... Like all versions of SQL Server 2000, SQL Server 2000 Personal Edition
and MSDE 2000 allow 32,767 connections to an instance of the database
engine.
There is no limit for the number of connections that can be executing
operations at the same time. The only effect of the workload governor is that it
starts slowing down the database engine when more than eight operations are actively
running at the same time.
Once it has been activated, the workload governor limits performance by
stalling a user connection for a few milliseconds each time the connection requests
a logical read or write on any of the pages in the data files of a database.
(The governor does not affect log files.)
The database engine waits before every data page reference as long as
there are more than eight active concurrent operations. When the number of
active operations is eight or lower, the database engine does not wait before
scheduling any reads or writes.
50 simultaneous users does *not* equal 50 simultaneous connections.
Users do *not* request database operations at all times they are
connected.
Some time is spent reading the results, too, which downlevels
the number of connections being accessed simultaneously.
A few milliseconds delay for an MSDE read/write operation is negligible,
and *no* read/write operation will be denied.
In any case, performance will be better for an MSDE database
than for an Access database when users are approximately 50.
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP
http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================
"Paul Clement" <Us***********************@swspectrum.com> wrote in message
news:3l********************************@4ax.com... On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:22:40 -0400, "Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote:
¤ Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single
"asp_net ¤ worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous
human ¤ users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single
user. ¤ Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB)
database ¤ backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an
advantageous ¤ change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users
in ¤ any way?
¤
As Bob mentioned in one of his posts you may want to keep in mind the
that MSDE has a Workload
Governor that will throttle connections when there are more than eight
concurrent operations. This
could perceptibly affect performance when using MSDE.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Good point, Scott !
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================
"Scott Allen" <sc***@nospam.odetocode.com> wrote in message
news:g0********************************@4ax.com... Hi Dan:
In addition to the other good advice, I'll point out the moving to
MSDE now will put you in an easier position to move to SQL 2005
Express when it ships. There is no workload governor in 2005 and the
feature set compared to Access is even greater.
--
Scott
http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:22:40 -0400, "Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote:
Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single "asp_net
worker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous human
users of the website would appear to the database backend as a single user.
Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB) database
backend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an advantageous
change to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
any way?
That's another clincher!
Now I'm curious as to the increased feature set...:) I'll find out
eventually.
"Scott Allen" <sc***@nospam.odetocode.com> wrote in message
news:g0********************************@4ax.com... Hi Dan:
In addition to the other good advice, I'll point out the moving to
MSDE now will put you in an easier position to move to SQL 2005
Express when it ships. There is no workload governor in 2005 and the
feature set compared to Access is even greater.
--
Scott
http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:22:40 -0400, "Dan V." <da**@yah.com> wrote:
Since an ASP.NET/ADO.NET website is run on the server by a single
"asp_networker process", therefore doesn't that mean that even 50 simultaneous
humanusers of the website would appear to the database backend as a single
user.Therefore, wouldn't switching our Access (actually Jet 4.0 OLEDB)
databasebackend on our ASP.NET/ADO.NET website to an MSDE backend be an
advantageouschange to make while NOT limiting the number of simultaneous web users in
any way? This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: Tim Morrison |
last post by:
SQL Server 2000 - MSDE 2000
Is there a way to get the number of current users logged into a SQL 2000 Server (also MSDE)? Cant be distinct users as most users are logged into the database using the...
|
by: *no spam* |
last post by:
I want to move my Access 2K database into MSDE. The Access Upsizing
Wizard crashes (a known bug wi A2K), so I'm using the following
suggested method:
Access --> New --> Project (Existing...
|
by: Mitch Olson |
last post by:
Hi
our company is just about to embark on developing a PIM-type application and
would like to use .NET (VB6 is our distant option 2).
The question we are currently investigating is whether the...
|
by: Robin Tucker |
last post by:
I'm looking for a simple way of telling (inside a stored procedure) if I'm
currently using MSDE or a full SQL server. Ideally, there is some
pre-defined environment variable that won't cause me...
|
by: Stephen Corey |
last post by:
I'm writing an app that basically just appends text to a text file on a
Win2K Server. They fill out a form, click a button, and 1 line is
appended to the file. Multiple people will run this app at...
|
by: Anthony P. Mancini |
last post by:
Does anyone know how to make the MSDE do
SQL authentication ? It appears to authenticate
using Windows at all times.
Thanks,
Anthony
|
by: Mark |
last post by:
What's the best way to simulate 30 simultaneous web users without:
1. Asking our 30 favorite friends to participate
2. Opening 30 different browsers manually on my desktop.
Thanks in advance....
|
by: Simon |
last post by:
Is there HTTP connection limit of 2 simultaneous connections in webservices?
For example what hapens if you use webservices form ASP.NET web application?
Presumably ASP.NET is webservices client to...
|
by: accyboy1981 |
last post by:
Hi,
I currently looking into creating a website that is database driven in
asp.net 2.0 and using C#. In creating this website there could be a
maximum of 350 simulataneous accessing the...
|
by: Kemmylinns12 |
last post by:
Blockchain technology has emerged as a transformative force in the business world, offering unprecedented opportunities for innovation and efficiency. While initially associated with cryptocurrencies...
|
by: antdb |
last post by:
Ⅰ. Advantage of AntDB: hyper-convergence + streaming processing engine
In the overall architecture, a new "hyper-convergence" concept was proposed, which integrated multiple engines and...
|
by: Arjunsri |
last post by:
I have a Redshift database that I need to use as an import data source. I have configured the DSN connection using the server, port, database, and credentials and received a successful connection...
|
by: WisdomUfot |
last post by:
It's an interesting question you've got about how Gmail hides the HTTP referrer when a link in an email is clicked. While I don't have the specific technical details, Gmail likely implements measures...
|
by: Carina712 |
last post by:
Setting background colors for Excel documents can help to improve the visual appeal of the document and make it easier to read and understand. Background colors can be used to highlight important...
|
by: BLUEPANDA |
last post by:
At BluePanda Dev, we're passionate about building high-quality software and sharing our knowledge with the community. That's why we've created a SaaS starter kit that's not only easy to use but also...
|
by: Rahul1995seven |
last post by:
Introduction:
In the realm of programming languages, Python has emerged as a powerhouse. With its simplicity, versatility, and robustness, Python has gained popularity among beginners and experts...
|
by: Johno34 |
last post by:
I have this click event on my form. It speaks to a Datasheet Subform
Private Sub Command260_Click()
Dim r As DAO.Recordset
Set r = Form_frmABCD.Form.RecordsetClone
r.MoveFirst
Do
If...
|
by: ezappsrUS |
last post by:
Hi,
I wonder if someone knows where I am going wrong below. I have a continuous form and two labels where only one would be visible depending on the checkbox being checked or not. Below is the...
| | |
