MS Access is NOT and Enterprise Solution
-
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:
-
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 totally disagree! MS Access is a much saner choice than some that I have seen. The worst are the ones that use Excel as their database. Be thankful they didn't take this route, as I am sure they considered it. You are here - through no fault of mine!
-
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.
Yeah, I know the feeling. Sometimes I want to pull my hair out when I know something is not gonna work and despite my arguments they still don't listen. It's really frustrating. There's a little releif when the day comes and you say: "I told you so!". But that isn't worth all the emotional hit. That's why I'm incubating my own company, if it works, stuff like this won't happen so often.
-
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.
Years ago I ran in to the same problem so oftem I tried adopting the credo: Tell me where you want to go, and I show you how to get there. However, if you dictate how how you want to get there, I'll tell you where to go. It didn't take long before I realized that while it sounds good, it's not the real world. There will be many times in your career when the customer thinks they need to control every aspect of the job, incluing making decisions they are not qualified to make. While our brians are telling us to scream "IDIOT!", our wallets force us to do what we must to feed the family. In the end, the man or woman who writes the check is always right. If you feel there is a potential liability in the decision, then document your concerns; email is fine. Be very professional about it. Don't write any thing while you are upset, or say anything you wouldn't want read aloud in a court of law.
-
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've been down this road too. You sir, get a 5.
-
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.
Welcome to the real world Neo, you should have taken the blue pill (or red one, I cant remember which one was the good one)
Edgar Prieto Software Engineer
-
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 feel your pain. We have a similar situation here at my job. Business using Access to manage a data file stored on a network share. Let's just say it's been a blast to the past as I feel like I'm doing desktop support every time it gets corrupted. The sad thing is, we have a pretty robust enterprise architecture in place - sql servers, regular backup processes, you name it. But because some moron thought they could get what they wanted faster by using an "out-of-the-box" tool and because the original developers involved didn't have enough balls to say NO this decision continues to suck revenue out of the business as skills and time are wasted trying to strong arm a desktop product into being a centralized dbms and I got to inherit the whole mess. Trying to move it towards a better model but it's one of those things where once a business process sits upon a terrible idea it's not always as simple as pulling the rug out from underneath. The "learn to laugh it off" approach is definitely the only respite I've found - though sometimes the sheer idiocy at play can make that a challenge. Good luck!
-
A while back I the company I worked for wanted a system to process large numbers of records in where security was pretty ciritical important. What would you do? Hire a security expert, get some a crack team of devs together and work out secure, scalable and robust system? Yes? I wish you'd worked in my old place. Here my ex-company's simple 12 step plan for greatness: 1. Sell your ability to process before getting anyone from IT to give a realistic idea of the effort required. 2. Get some bloke in the processing department, Bill or Eric or Alan* or something to write an Access/VBA system 2a. Wait until the 100,000s transactions per day fill up the 2GB limit on the database. This takes about 3 months BTW. 3. Contact IT to get them to fix the problem. Then make sure everyone know this is the now the top development priority. 4. Put a cack team of two developers onto it: one a graduate developer whose experience is in another framework, the other who [seemingly] hasn't kept up to date for 8 years. 5. Don't keep tabs on the chaps as they descend into their silo and don't contact the processing department. 6. Enjoy the mayhem as the system isn't even close to what is needed. 7. Throw very experienced devs into the team to sort the problems (and replace the original devs, who sensibly leave). Don't listen to the senior's recommmendations: drop this as fixing it will take longer. 8. Continue to ignore this advice from multiple sources as we are always "just around the corner". For 24 months. 9. Basque in the delight as the processing department assume each dev is stupid because a) Point 6 is their experience [legitimate] b) None of the developers understand the business requirements immediately through some telepathic process presumably [not]. 10. Revel in the warm glow of having glorfied clerks talk down to the experienced (and highly qualified) devs like, erm, glorfied clerks. Don't make any attempt to stop this, it will only raise morale in the already angry dev team. 11. Ensure that, instead of actually changing the system, you continue pargeting what you have, so adding to the big ball of mud and each fix breaks at least one other thing. 12. Watch as your most senior dev leaves, followed by each team member who has been forced to work on the project for more than a month. Great Sucess! I've been gone now for a good while, my contacts inform me they are still trying to fix the original system. At least they've got the records to check correctly for the first time. In the pr
Sue de Nime wrote:
* The names have been changed to protect the guilty.
yes, Alan is Bill, Bill is Eric and Eric wrote the post...
Edgar Prieto Software Engineer
-
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
To be honest: I don't know. When SQL Server is not an option because of the price or because SQL Server Express is too limited, I usually use Postgre SQL. It's really free, can handle huge databases and never disappointed me.
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.
-
Slacker007 wrote:
it is not dependable and it crashes all the time and is constantly prone to corruption
Sounds exactly like an "enterprise solution" to me :-\
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Sounds exactly like an "enterprise solution" to me
:laugh: :laugh:
-
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:
Stefan63 wrote:
in favor of switching to Lotus Notes.
If I had to develop "anything" in Lotus Notes then I would walk myself out to the back field and put a bullet through my head. :) I have a hard enough time using Lotus Notes for e-mail let alone developing a solution with it.