Re: Which is better - more tables or more DSN's ???

>In article <77ldiv$dr7$1_at_nnrp1.dejanews.com>, john_kozubik_at_hotmail.com  wrote:
>>We currently have 50 MS access databases each with their own DSN that we
 use
>>to access them with ODBC. I am in favor of moving the single table from
 each
>>database into one single database and using one DSN.
>>
>>What is the tradeoff? I am of the mind that we will achieve faster
>>performance having all of the tables in one place, and be more prepared
 for
>>disaster recovery, as we only need to set up one DSN. I want to make
 sure,
>>however, that I am not degrading database performance by placing all 50
>>tables in one database. Eventually there will be upwards of 2000 tables
 in
>>there (as opposed to eventually having 2000 DSN's)

Sorry - you have problem by place only 50 tables to Oracle database?????

If you use ODBC - performance degrading in CLIENT-places. Count tables in databases with indifference.

Best regards
÷ÓÅÈ âÌÁÇ

---
Origin ... ðÒÏÓÔÏ ÎÁÄÏ ÏÞÅÎØ ×ÅÒÉÔØ ÜÔÉÍ ÓÉÎÉÍ ÍÁÑËÁÍ...
Romanov Alexander
Alexander.Romanov_at_usa.net
ICQ 6220754