Re: MS Access usefulness and size restrictions

I'll probably join you Wayne and Larry on thatplonk list.

Not many users but I have an application that regularly searches on 1/2 million records, each match then has to traverse up self joins on a middle table until a root is reached. It's doing a lot of work, probably to return 1000 matches will typically perform 5000 seeks on one table then join two others into the result. It does this typically in less than a second.

Not bad for toy.

Wayne Gillespie <bestfit_at_NObestfitsoftwareSPAM.com.au> wrote in message news:<32a3itggkrpgijgoeestqmh9p0qouiu995_at_4ax.com>...
> On 09 Jun 2001 04:03:05 GMT, "wayne" <no_at_email.please.com> wrote:
>
> Dispite your protestations, the fact is Larry is correct and you are
> VERY wrong.
>
> Without seeing your code or having any knowledge of what your systems
> do, I can say with confidence that if your Access database is
> beginning to fall over with more than 5 users then -
> a) Your network configuration is hopelessly inadequate for the task.
> b) Your database is very poorly designed.
> c) Both
>
> I currently have 2 apps in active use with more than 50 users, and the
> performance level of these is quite acceptable. There are specific
> issues which need to be considered in the design of the app to achieve
> good performance, but this is true of any database created in any
> format.
>
> Obviously a client/server database will out perform a desktop database
> when a large number of users is involved, but to suggest that Access
> is useless above 5 users is nothing short of lunacy.
>
> Please add my name to your plonk list below Larry's.
>
>
> >
> >All right. You crossed the line into language bigotry (you've never even
> >seen my code, nor have you any idea of what my systems do!).
> >
> >I am not reading the rest of your post and I am not answering to you
> >anymore.
> >
Received on Sat Jun 09 2001 - 06:59:34 CDT