Donna, I don't have you experience with newer Access, but why would you use that over SQL 2005 Express edition?
Chris -----Original Message----- From: Donna Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:10 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Access Query Question Sorry...I beg to differ. Access is most certainly not the db of choice for large--or even medium-sized-apps with many, many users or mega-records, but has its place. In the newer versions, Access can be locked at the record level, and does not effect changes made to other records within the same table. Also, it can be set to compress on close, and does get smaller when records are deleted. This, too, may be only in the newer versions...I just know this to be true through usage. For the most part, I use Oracle for web apps. However, I have several websites using Access as the backend, as well as ~12 non-web networked applications. I have to say...if built properly, Access is pretty stable. My personal experience with it is this: I have yet to have any of these database instances to be corrupted or bloated in over five years of very active usage. Again...do not misunderstand me. It has its place and has its limitations. But when these considerations are respected, Access behaves itself nicely. Just my very small 'two-cents'. Donna (have never responded to this 'very wonderful' list...first time...Hi, Dave!) >> Me too, but they are mostly urban legends. >> Like for instance "Access is really bad when serving many users at >> the same time". >> >> This affirmation just does not make sense for WEB applications. >> This may be true for an Access application on a lan, but since when >> used with CF there is always only ONE user: >> coldFusion, it does not apply. > >Unfortunately, those aren't urban legends at all. While you might only >have one login being used, what Access has problems with is >concurrency. This has nothing to do with the number of users, and >everything to do with the number of requests. Access locks the entire >table when you update a single record in that table! That obviously won't scale well. > >Also, Access databases grow in file size as you add records, but don't >shrink or reuse space as you delete records. So, a volatile table >(like, say, one holding CF client variables) will cause the Access >database to keep growing and growing, even if the number of records >doesn't grow. I encountered one server environment where the Access >database was around 2 GB, and it had maybe two hundred records in it. It was ... very ... >sl-o-o-w. > >Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >http://www.figleaf.com/ > >Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized >instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, >Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. >Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information! > >This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJP Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:275842 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
