Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

MS-Access no soporta triggers

MS-Access vias ODBC no soporta cursores


De: Dr. Gerald Stinger Guala [stinger@FAIRCHILDGARDEN.ORG]

Enviado: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:22 AM
Asunto: Re: Database - summary
The MSAccess simultaneous users problem on the web is averted in part by using
a dsnless connection to your ASPs (and resetting the timeout
setting) so that the server creates a separate session for each user query, then
the number of users is just a function of CPU resources allocated. I agree thou
gh and we will probably eventually move to SQL as well eventually for a few othe
r reasons. It's only money.
I too have looked at Biolink a few times and I spoke to Steve Shattuck about it
at the TDWG meetings in Sydney a few months ago. It should eventually be really
good. Unfortunately, there is currently no good way to handle multiformat (or an
y) image serving to the web and there are only really the most rudimentary plans
for such "someday" was my understanding from him. Thus, given that we run sever
al graphics dependant databases, it just won't work for us.
Gerald "Stinger" Guala, Ph.D.
Keeper of the Herbarium
Fairchild Tropical Garden Research Center
11935 Old Cutler Rd.
Coral Gables, FL 33156-4299
-----Original Message----From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM@USOBI.ORG]On Behalf Of Richard Pyl
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: Database - summary

MS Access is the most popular database software (be careful, Access

should not be used for larger databases. For example, Willoughby Ass.
t,snap.html,intro_right recommend only 60.000 objects for their
Access-based database SNAP!)

Access 2000 can handle files up to 2GB in size. I've been able to successfully d
evelop databases entirely within MS Access for up to about a quarter-million tax
on "assertion" records -- linking 66K taxon names to 20K Reference citaions, alo
ngside 40K collection objects and 10K records of people and organizations (all-t
old involving about 60 linked tables) -- all within a single file less than 200M
B. It operates amazingly well on a single-processor, 366Mhz Pentium laptop. When
you consider that nearly half the file size is made up by about 50 embedded hires images (which would best not be embedded), and even then we're only talking
10% of Access' capacity, I think it's safe to say that file size is not the main
limiting factor. Databases with >>60K records are routinly handled with ease b
y Access, provided the system was designed and coded well.

The real limitation that I've encountered in Access is with respect to the numbe
r of simultaneous concurrent users. Who you should believe for "actual" number
of simultaneous concurrent users that Access can support depends on a lot of fac
tors, but we've generally had success with up to about 5 or 6 -- but mini-crashe
s (e.g., individual record locks crapping
out) crop up from time to time, even with a half-dozen users. For this reason,
we are moving in the direction of SQLServer with Access front-ends to handle mos
t of our in-house DB development needs. Incidentally, we are also evaluating Bio
Link at the moment for our Botany collection. So far, we're very encouraged. I
t seems to have the right combination of well-developed schema, good user interf
ace tools, and direct access to data due to its SQL Server platform.
Una Smith wrote:
P.S. Just read this:

As for the assertion that you should not use Access for large
databases, this is pure propaganda that was once true but is now
outdated and unfortunately maintained by Oracle and its affectionados.
I have one database with 180,000 records in it that runs fine in
Access2000. The limit is around 2 gigabytes for the size of the mdb
file. That would be 3.6 million records in my herbarium database. Then
you can export to SQL automatically - unlike a lot of MS software, it
actually works, I've tried it.

It's not just Oracle affectionados -- I've heard the same erroneous propaganda c
oming out of FoxPro diehards as well. The Oracle part I can understand, given L
arry Ellison's feelings about Bill Gates....but FoxPro is now owned by MS, so I'
m not sure what fuels that fire. This is not to say that certain aspects of Ora
cle and/or FoxPro aren't superior to Jet 4.0 or SQLServer....but when the anti-A
ccess crowd resorts to false information to make their case, it's a bit disturbi

Richard L. Pyle
Ichthyology, Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
email: deepreef@bishopmuseum.org http://www.bishopmuseum.org/bishop/HBS/pylerich
"The views expressed are not necessarily those of Bishop Museum."