Also it can't deal with Oracle numbers if they have "too" much precision
(over 15).
Jim
"Glen A Stromquist" <gstromquist_at_nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:RDqh8.80502$Ym3.13771356_at_news0.telusplanet.net...
>
> > <snip>
> > > although Access still
> > > can be used for a "front-end" for a SQL Server or Oracle database,
> which
> > > IMHO is far to "buggy" for this purpose and there are better
> alternatives.
> >
> > Can you describe some of the (apparently many) bugs encountered when
> > using Access as a Front-End to a SQL Server database?
>
> No, perhaps I should have been clearer, my experience is using it with an
> Oracle database, which *should* be the same as it is still accessing
linked
> tables. Some of the problems with it when connected to Oracle? Suddenly
> incorrectly interpreting date formats when importing in to a native access
> table for unknown reasons, suddenly missing columns of data in reports,
> dropping ODBC connections for no apparent reason, missing some data on
> reports that show up in the corresponding and identical SQL query, etc....
>
> What is/are the
> > alternative(s) you are proposing and why?
> >
> Powerbuilder, VB, Oracle Portal, etc.
>
> I'm sure that there *may* be valid reasons for the above problems, and I
> admit I am no "expert" per se when it comes to heavy-duty access
> programming, but at least two Access programmers we have on contract are
> just as mystified as I am with some of the problems we run in to, and our
> app's that were built in Powerbuilder never have any of these "unexpected"
> issues pop up.
>
> I still like Access if I need to throw something together with just a few
> tables and need some slick looking forms/graphs/pop-ups for a front end,
> often in a matter of hours an applet can be built to meet the needs. But
for
> proper error handling, data security, auditing etc. for a
"mission-critical"
> database, you need something like Oracle or SQL Server IMO. And my
> experience with it as a front end is anything but positive, so my views
are
> tainted there.
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Mar 06 2002 - 20:50:40 CST
