Re: Databases

In article <36b041d2.1_at_grissom.powerup.com.au>,   "Doug Hutcheson" <hutchsys_at_powerup.com.au> wrote:
> I would rank Access, FoxPro. aradox and dBase at a similar level in terms of
> target market (the low-hanging fruit), with Oracle and MS SQL a large step
> up.

Agreed. The first four are desktop databases, the latter two are client-server databases. The two are in completely difference leagues in terms of features and cost.

> The choices for me would be between Access, SQL and Oracle.

From here on I disagree.

> Access is a no-brainer, as it uses a widely-known dialect of Visual Basic,
> hence support in the programmer sense wpould be better.

You would not buy a car just because it can be fixed easily. Why a database? If it were, everyone would be driving Tauruses, and every car manufacturer but Ford would be out of business.

Access is a VERY good beginner's single-user database (Lotus Approach is excellent), but as you go into advanced applications developement for multiple users, several of its limitations shows itself and must be worked around, and eventually, upgrade to SQL server. Access's multi-user performance is inferior to dBase and Paradox due to its page-locking scheme. All of these limitations must be considered.

All in all, the recommendations depends on the actual requirements, any existing systems to interface/upgrade, how far to the future to plan, etc. There is simply not enough information to make any suggestions at this time.

Kuo-Sheng "Kasey" Chang / spam-hater / X-Com Guru Sci-Fi Fan / Treknologist / Military buff / a guy (yes, male!)

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own Received on Thu Jan 28 1999 - 00:00:00 CET