Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: How does Access 97 rate as a front end?

Re: How does Access 97 rate as a front end?

From: <karlk_at_allin.com>
Date: 1999/01/13
Message-ID: <77gvnr$jr2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1

Anyone come across tools that convert Access SQL syntax (FROM table_name INNER JOIN table_name etc...) to Oracle compliant SQL. I am pulling my hair out doing this by hand on some pretty complex joins.

In article <3687D8D6.2949ABE3_at_jsc.nasa.gov>,   Default User <user_at_jsc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
> My personal experience with Access as a proto-typing tool has been very good.
 Used
> as a production tool it has been extremly poor. Access is brutally heavy on
 the client
> end and unreliable on the server side. It makes it easy to use non-standard
 table
> naming
> and SQL, both of which make it hard to port even to other M$ products.
>
> As a front end I personally would never recomend using it. It is extremely
 taxing
> on the client machine. VB supports pretty much anything Access can do, and
> quite a bit that Access can't. If you use the RDO connection methods with VB
> rather than DAO when talking to Oracle or SQL Server you will see much better
> performance. RDO is not availible in Access. VB is still heavy on the client
> compared to Delphi or C++, but acceptable in most cases. VB is less prone to
> crashes than Access and gives you a great deal more flexability and control
 over
> your events and code. VB is not as idiot proof and requires a little more
 experience
> to use, but if your talking a production product Access is just about my last
 choice
> in what to use as a front end.
>
> My experience is based upon industry work I have done using VB, Access, and
> Delphi against Oracle, Access, SQL Server, Interbase, and Sybase backends.
> In every case Access was used we regretted it very quickly. VB was the easiest
> and quickest to use, Delphi the most powerfull and flexable front ends. Oracle
> was the most powerfull backend, Interbase was the easiest to use of the back
> ends.
>
> Anyway thats my two cents on Access.
>
> >since then), Oracle's ODBC drivers for version 8.X were UNABLE TO HANDLE
>OUTER
>
> Ouch, that is not a good way to get folks using a product. That fact alone
 might
> cause my current client to not upgrade to Oracle 8 just yet. We could re-write
> the SQL to get around using the sprinkled outer joins in our code but why do
> that when it works now with Oracle 7.
>
> Tim Romano wrote:
>
> >
> > So, if your application is for "casual" ad hoc use with a smallish database
 (~
> > 50mb) then Access might well suffice. But if you have a commercial-quality
> > client-server application in mind, then Access won't be suitable.
>
> I wouldn't advise using Access for production products. Too many hassles. Sure
> you can create a purty form very quickly, but that form will come back to
 haunt
> you as the back end crashes repeatedly, or as the out of memory messages pour
 in, or
> when you want to port it to a larger more stable back end.
>
>

Karl Kuhnhausen
Allin Consulting
karlk_at_allin.com

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own Received on Wed Jan 13 1999 - 00:00:00 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US