If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. TY. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
I seem to be in a minority in believing that the ever increasing power of the
PC, plus that LANs generally are not bandwidth constrained - means that the requirement to move to sqlserver is pushed further and further away each year. There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access problem exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver.... Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away from sqlserver as most presume growth. There are several good & valid reasons to move to sqlserver - it is a very solid product - - so at the same time there would need to be solid reasons to move away from it. If your organization is running sqlserver routinely for several other db apps then one would tend to think you should stay with it. On the otherhand you kind of imply your company is downsizing in various dimensions - and going strictly PC/LAN environment is certainly more frugal than managing sqlserver. Fundamentally can Access do the job? that's kind of yes/no...and then which is less/more painful? managing the exiting environment vs the effort to downsize it off sqlserver.... Am not sure any generic advice can really assess your situation from a forum... "briank" wrote: I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. TY. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
Thank you for your thoughts on this situation. Currently my employee seems
to be firmly in place with using SQL 2005. With this in mind I am now trying to determine which is best with the SQL connection, either accdb or adp. I hear opinions supporting each way but I'm trying to determine what factual evidence is the most swaying. I appreciate any thoughts on this. "GBA" wrote: I seem to be in a minority in believing that the ever increasing power of the PC, plus that LANs generally are not bandwidth constrained - means that the requirement to move to sqlserver is pushed further and further away each year. There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access problem exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver.... Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away from sqlserver as most presume growth. There are several good & valid reasons to move to sqlserver - it is a very solid product - - so at the same time there would need to be solid reasons to move away from it. If your organization is running sqlserver routinely for several other db apps then one would tend to think you should stay with it. On the otherhand you kind of imply your company is downsizing in various dimensions - and going strictly PC/LAN environment is certainly more frugal than managing sqlserver. Fundamentally can Access do the job? that's kind of yes/no...and then which is less/more painful? managing the exiting environment vs the effort to downsize it off sqlserver.... Am not sure any generic advice can really assess your situation from a forum... "briank" wrote: I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. TY. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
There is no factual evidence. You have said it yourself: you are trying to
follow the code written by four different peoples and above that, maybe that you'll soon add the code of a fifth person. Unless the employees at your company are working for free, these kinds of parameters are much more important than speaking about increasing PC powers and LAN bandwidth. There are other considerations as well such as the security and confidentialiy of your data. Only you can know about how much these other considerations might be important to your company and they will/might a great impact on the decision of chosing between either ACCDB or ADP or a third solution or even a mix of multiple solutions. -- Sylvain Lafontaine, ing. MVP - Windows Live Platform Blog/web site: http://coding-paparazzi.sylvainlafontaine.com Independent consultant and remote programming for Access and SQL-Server (French) "briank" wrote in message ... Thank you for your thoughts on this situation. Currently my employee seems to be firmly in place with using SQL 2005. With this in mind I am now trying to determine which is best with the SQL connection, either accdb or adp. I hear opinions supporting each way but I'm trying to determine what factual evidence is the most swaying. I appreciate any thoughts on this. "GBA" wrote: I seem to be in a minority in believing that the ever increasing power of the PC, plus that LANs generally are not bandwidth constrained - means that the requirement to move to sqlserver is pushed further and further away each year. There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access problem exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver.... Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away from sqlserver as most presume growth. There are several good & valid reasons to move to sqlserver - it is a very solid product - - so at the same time there would need to be solid reasons to move away from it. If your organization is running sqlserver routinely for several other db apps then one would tend to think you should stay with it. On the otherhand you kind of imply your company is downsizing in various dimensions - and going strictly PC/LAN environment is certainly more frugal than managing sqlserver. Fundamentally can Access do the job? that's kind of yes/no...and then which is less/more painful? managing the exiting environment vs the effort to downsize it off sqlserver.... Am not sure any generic advice can really assess your situation from a forum... "briank" wrote: I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. TY. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
"briank" wrote I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. TY. At one time, the Access Product Group at Microsoft recommended ADP for direct connection to SQL Server. That is no longer the case (partly because the OLEdb technology on which ADP and ADO are based has been supplanted by successor technology based on ADO.NET -- which shares with classic ADO only the three initials in its name). The product group now recommends ACCDB or MDB to link, via ODBC to SQL Server (or other ODBC-compliant server) not ADP. Some have liked ADP in the past, but I wouldn't recommend it under the current set of circumstances. Larry Linson Microsoft Office Access MVP |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
Thank you everyone for your feedback. "briank" wrote: I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. TY. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
=?Utf-8?B?YnJpYW5r?= wrote in
: I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. For what it's worth, Microsoft has been deprecating ADPs in favor of MDB/ODBC for the last several years. This is likely to change with the next version of Access (i.e., the version *after* 2010) because the Access team has been doing a special project in trying to seek out users of SQL Server and make Access work better with it. So, I'd expect ADPs to get new life in Access 15 (ADPs have been basically ignored in A2007 and A2010, which should tell you something about how well-implemented they were). ODBC really is old and creaky, and I really wish ODBC2 would be created and incorporate the best aspects of ADO. That wouldn't be ..NET-compliant, but it would cover a whole host of issues that come with using ODBC access to modern databases. For now, I would not contemplate using an ADP for any purpose. If the Access team does as stellar a job on improving ADPs as they have with the A2010 Sharepoint integration, it should be a big hit, and then become the de facto best choice for development against SQL Server back ends. The main flaw for me with that, though, is that it's not back-end agnostic, which is something I consider important. I'd love to have the capabilities of an ADP when connecting to MySQL, for instance. But that would be MS giving up a certain amount of proprietary advantage. On the other hand, MS has done that with real browser agnosticism with Sharepoint 2010, so it's possible. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that one! -- David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/ usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
=?Utf-8?B?R0JB?= wrote in
: There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access problem exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver.... Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away from sqlserver as most presume growth. I think most often the people recommending SQL Server at the drop of a hat are Access bigots, i.e., people who really haven't a clue what they are talking about. That said, you can find some real Access gurus who don't do development against anything but SQL Server. However, that may have more to do with the client base that they work with, i.e., their clients are in a position to easily administer SQL Server, and have requirements that make it a no-brainer. I have only a handful of clients for whom SQL Server is appropriate -- most "microbusinesses" (as I call small businesses in the 5-10 employees range) have very little need for what SQL Server offers (though some really small businesses *do* need the security and reliability and scalability, because of the nature of their apps and the amount of data being processes). SQL Server is certainly no magic bullet. Like any upgrade, it makes sense to upgrade not just because there's a new version to upgrade to, but because you have existing problems that the upgrade will ameliorate or completely resolve. If you can't identify exactly what problem(s) upsizing will resolve, then there is actually no reason to upsize. -- David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/ usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
=?Utf-8?B?YnJpYW5r?= wrote in
: Thank you for your thoughts on this situation. Currently my employee seems to be firmly in place with using SQL 2005. With this in mind I am now trying to determine which is best with the SQL connection, either accdb or adp. I hear opinions supporting each way but I'm trying to determine what factual evidence is the most swaying. I appreciate any thoughts on this. If you have an existing MDB application, no matter how confusingly architected, you should stick with it and just fix the problems. Likely when you understand the code you'll realize it didn't get convoluted by accident. That is, very often convoluted solutions reflect a previous developer's struggle and resolution of a complex problem, and the result will encode a lot of factual information about the problem being solved. Trashing it and starting over with an ADP will mean you lose all the knowledge reflected in the code that's been implemented. That said, yes, sometimes convoluted code comes about because of a programmer who simply isn't aware of the better methods. But that kind of code is usually quite easy to spot and therefore pretty easy to upgrade to better methods. If you were starting with new development, I'd say 40/60 likelihood that ADP is the best choice. After all, MS has been deprecating ADPs for the last several years, even for new development, with the exception of reporting apps (which MS says do have certain performance advantages in ADPs). But all of this will change 2-3 years from now, with the release of Access 15, which apparently is going to address the neglect of ADPs in the last two releases. That isn't enough to convince me that it's wise to trash an MDB app and replace it with an ADP even then, but it's worth keeping in mind (i.e., the investment in moving to ADP could pay off 2 or 3 years down the road; on the other hand, the Access 15 ADPs could be sufficiently different to make current ADPs problematic). -- David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/ usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
accdb vs adp
"David W. Fenton" wrote in message 36.82... =?Utf-8?B?YnJpYW5r?= wrote in : I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on this scenario. For what it's worth, Microsoft has been deprecating ADPs in favor of MDB/ODBC for the last several years. This is likely to change with the next version of Access (i.e., the version *after* 2010) because the Access team has been doing a special project in trying to seek out users of SQL Server and make Access work better with it. So, I'd expect ADPs to get new life in Access 15 (ADPs have been basically ignored in A2007 and A2010, which should tell you something about how well-implemented they were). ODBC really is old and creaky, and I really wish ODBC2 would be created and incorporate the best aspects of ADO. That wouldn't be .NET-compliant, but it would cover a whole host of issues that come with using ODBC access to modern databases. For now, I would not contemplate using an ADP for any purpose. If the Access team does as stellar a job on improving ADPs as they have with the A2010 Sharepoint integration, it should be a big hit, and then become the de facto best choice for development against SQL Server back ends. The main flaw for me with that, though, is that it's not back-end agnostic, which is something I consider important. I'd love to have the capabilities of an ADP when connecting to MySQL, for instance. But that would be MS giving up a certain amount of proprietary advantage. On the other hand, MS has done that with real browser agnosticism with Sharepoint 2010, so it's possible. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that one! There may be something "like" an ADP, but ADPs rely on OLEdb and the current access mechanisms in "real development" (the bigots name for Dot Net stuff) use something other than OLEdb. I've worked in very few shops where they had a server back end, in which the DBA would allow "mere developers" to do design-side work on "the DBA's server". Yes, they had a very proprietary attitude. No, it wasn't likely to change. With small clients, you probably won't face that problem... I suspect that the fact that Microsoft targets enterprise customers may have something to do with their "neglect" of ADPs... they found out that many of the wonderful features they had included were simply prohibited to developers in their target audience. Larry Linson Microsoft Office Access MVP |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|