MS Access is NOT and Enterprise Solution
-
That's one I can buy! And also if you're looking for a single file solution as MS Access, there's SQL Server Compact Edition. But it's not quite as versatile as the Express version.
1f y0u c4n r34d 7h15 y0u r3411y n33d 70 g37 14!d Gotta run; I've got people to do and things to see... Don't tell my folks I'm a computer programmer - They think I'm a piano player in a cat house... Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
I've used MySQL and SQL Express for free databases (also SQL Server standard and enterprise) - SQL Express is good if you are familiar with SQL Server, and your database won't exceed 10 GB (2008) or 4GB (2005-). Doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the full version, but has all the data storage features. The InnoDB engine in MySQL supports transactions and foreign keys, and my experiences with it were quite good. I left the company I developed a fairly large project with quite a bit of data being processed and they switched to SQL Server - only to see the data upload (this happened weekly or monthly for every client, and they were looking to do some clients daily - several GB of flat file upload) take 3 times as long with SQL Server. Which is to say, while you may prefer SQL Server, I wouldn't consider MySQL a toy (although I would be concerned with the current politics surrounding it). Currently I maintain a .NET application running over SQL Server - we use Express for small customers (some even run SQL Server and application on the same desktop), and standard or enterprise for larger customers - nice thing is the codebase is the same, just change the connection string.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
PC's are never ment to run Enterprise Solutions, but Enterprises do. Oracle is an other solution, but not cheap. Access is mostly done, to have quick a solution and than the Enterprise think that's it ! Then the wanted to use it and think, that everybody must use this and that is where it is not ment for, because it's ment to run for 1 person on a Personal Computer, instead of a mainframe or mini. That's the mistake.
Fred
-
Not really. MySQL may be fast, but that's about it. As I see it, this speed is bought by omitting some very useful things like transactions. And transactions are a thing I do not like to have to do without.
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
Did you look into Azure pricing? http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlazure/default.aspx[^]
CDP1802 wrote:
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
LOL
-
I hear what you are saying. I know I need to learn to laugh it off - my wife says the same thing.
You will ALWAYS encounter at some time someone who KNOWS their solution will work great. I told them, their solution wouldn't work. I built reports showing that the solution they proposed was severely inaccurate. My manager finally said, "You've given them everything you could to talk them out of it. Build it EXACTLY like they want it." Turns out there is a little satisfaction in getting revenge, by doing it exactly like they ask for. The first week: "The data isn't accurate!" "Really! You mean it is acting just like I said it would?" "We'll fix the data" "Uh-huh. Data that has been inaccurate for years will suddenly fix itself." Next month: "The data isn't accurate!" "Oh? Gee, that's too bad." Finally, the ones who insisted they knew the right way to do it, left in a huff. The ones who didn't care how its done, they just wanted answers, remained. We got together and came up with a solution that we both agreed might work. Turned out to work pretty good. Luckily the new data source seemed to maintain about 90% accuracy instead of the old source that remained at around 20%. Lucky because there wasn't an alternate source to look at. I can't even say for sure it was accurate, but only 10% of reported activity didn't match up with the source tracking the workstations being used.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
Unfortunately working for someone other than yourself often means leaving your principles and common sense at home when you leave for work in the mornings. The most you can do is take a small victory in knowing that you're right and that the client will come crying back to you saying the same when it all goes wrong.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
At the risk of sounding AOLish: I agree 101%
-
The Access database is not entreprise class but if you use Access as the front end and SQL Server at the back you could have an acceptable solution that is both agile and robust.
Access versions later than 2000 have an enormous bug with a certain class of SQL transactions, one that changes with processor speed, and is related to faulty Access caching. It is an enterprise-killer, as well as a killer for non-enterprise facilities. MS are aware of the bug, admit it exists, but choose to do nothing about it as only a few folk have persevered & traced it to its source.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
Have Access as the Front End and migrate the data to SQL Server (or SQL Server Express). Then give everyone individual Access front ends on their own PCs. The front end can be maintained / refreshed with new versions by using the brilliant auto fe updater. Used to be free but not now. I started out as an Access developer and although I see its limitations (chiefly the database part) I think its fantastic. At the end of the day its the right tool for the right job.
-
Have Access as the Front End and migrate the data to SQL Server (or SQL Server Express). Then give everyone individual Access front ends on their own PCs. The front end can be maintained / refreshed with new versions by using the brilliant auto fe updater. Used to be free but not now. I started out as an Access developer and although I see its limitations (chiefly the database part) I think its fantastic. At the end of the day its the right tool for the right job.
I have toyed with the idea of using Access as the FE and SQL Server as the BE but just might build a FE in C#. I have been developing with Access on/off for many years and I am very well aware of what it can and can't do. Convincing others of this is a whole other story.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
Been there, done that and I had my own T-shirt printed. I feel your pain. I start shaking every time a manager mentions THAT product now. ;P P.S. In fact one 'solution', if you can call it that, has been running for 4-5 years and I'm still called to fix it weekly. Rather than replace it. :mad:
-
SQL Server Express is free, and a lot better than Access IMO.
And it scales ricky-tick up to full-blown SQL Server. Been there, done that, got the tattoo in a place you don't want to know about.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Are you joking? A database without transactions is of little use for anything but the simplest web applications. So why bother with it in the first place?
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
It IS possible to support transactions - I'm amazed how this misunderstanding persists.
-
It IS possible to support transactions - I'm amazed how this misunderstanding persists.
Sure, by using InnoDb tables. Tried that and found it to be a bit slow. With the MyISAM native format I could use transactions all I wanted, but nothing at all happened.
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
The problem is that management has still not accepted the idea that I.T. people are professionals and they hate having to show them any sort of respect. Not to mention PCs are cheap and they don't understand why they should pay someone so much to work on something so cheap. Used to be better back in the days of big-iron mainframes that cost oodles of money and the execs didn't mind paying for the expertise to run it. So they like Access because it is easy for some less-than-a-programmer office-worker type to use, which convinces them that Access is somehow powerful. Power=somebody can get something out of it kinda thing. They don't see things like bloat and impossible-to-report-on un-normalized data ...
-
Not really. MySQL may be fast, but that's about it. As I see it, this speed is bought by omitting some very useful things like transactions. And transactions are a thing I do not like to have to do without.
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
How about Firebird?
Kevin Rucker, Application Programmer QSS Group, Inc. United States Coast Guard OSC Kevin.D.Rucker@uscg.mil "Programming is an art form that fights back." -- Chad Hower
-
Johnny J. wrote:
If you feel that way, then you shouldn't work for others. You should be in business for yourself. As long as you work for others, they will always make you do stuff that you feel is stupid.
How is being in business for yourself different from working for others? It was the client that was at fault here, not the bosses. A new startup can't afford to be choosy about customers, so the new startup ends up with even crappier assignments. We all work for others (insert Adam Smith quote here)
You assume that being a consultant is the only way to make money. We're programmers. We can design and sell software (or ads if it's a high volume web-site).
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
I'm assuming that the application is broken up into tiers. If so, it should be very easy to fix. Just import the Access database into SQL Server, and change the database connections in the data tier. That shouldn't take more than a day or two.
-
I have found that the second a client finds out what can (potentially) be done with MS Access (or any other cheap solution) they then try to see how much work they can get done with this database software program. This is a bad thing in so many respects and on so many levels. I proposed C# with SQL Server - minimum. They wanted and "they payed" my company to see what I can get done with Access 2007. I told them their dreams will turn into nightmares in less than one month's time. They did not believe me. My advice and concerns have turned into reality. Microsoft Access is not meant to be a multi-user data entry system...it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption. Even Microsoft says that Access is not meant for this kind of work. I had no choice in the matter. I don't work for myself. I am not independently wealthy. I "need" this job right now; I have a family and bills to pay. Yet I am forced into working in a constant state of futility. Our client is a big-house and pays very well. Why couldn't they pay for the right solution to the problem the first time instead of taking the "usual" cheap man's way out is beyond me. I don't even know why my company allowed this contract to take off in the first place (a side from the money). I am emotionally spent. I need a vacation. They want me and another dumb-ass programmer to do a "complete" re-write. Thanks for reading.
Gosh, and I thought we (as in 'our department') were in trouble when one of our clients decided to dump the efforts we took to customize our network management system to their requirments, in favor of switching to Lotus Notes. Considering that we've only had about 50 man years of development time put into this product, and another 2-3 my to adapt it, it technically sounds like a good idea to switch to a product that has hundreds or even thousands of my gone into them, even though it's been designed as a general purpose office program rather than a specialized solution to manage the servicing of a huge telecommunication network .... not! :doh: Funny thing is - a couple of months later the company in question just vanished. No idea what happened, considering the foresight and wisdom of their management ... However, after reading your posting I now feel sorry for the poor guys designated to implement the whole maintenance stuff on Lotus notes! :omg: