-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derek Havelock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 9:43 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: limitations of Access
>
>
> Can I possibly add a question to this string ...
>
> Larry, you mentioned that:
>
> >we were running an auction site using Access that always was
> running at
> least 30 concurrent
> >sessions at a time with 50000 items in the database and did
> not appear to
> have a major problem.
>
> I don't see how that is possible - but am hoping that you can teach
> me something here.
> At the last place I worked, when more than one person
> accessed the same
> Access file, they were simply locked out. This would
> frequently happen when
> a salesperson tried to get into the product database to
> answer a customer
> query, but a product manager would already be in the file. -
> major disputes
> in the office when the customer can hear every word down the line
> :-)
Ahhh... They joys of MS Access file permissions. Sure you can have
lots of people accessing the same file based DB. Since all accesses
go throught the Microsoft JET DB engine, all the locking & whatnot is
handled for you.
The reason you were seeing only one person accessing the file at a
time is due to file permissions. In order to get multiple accesses
to one MS Access database, JET needs to create a lock file
(yourdatabase.ldb). In order to create a lock file, the user that
JET is running as needs read/write access to both your Access MDB
file *AND* the directory that contains it. Specifically, they need
change and create file rights on the directory so they can create
that .LDB file. If JET can't create the LDB file, it limits the DB
to one user at a time.
If you're accessing the site from CF, then the user that CF runs as
needs Change rights to the directory. With ASP, it's usually the
IUSR that needs that access. We usually just stick Everyone w/
Change rights on that directory for good measure...
(See below for more on Access cabilities.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kay Smoljak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 12:33 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: limitations of Access
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am doing a quote for a client that has an existing CF site
> using Access.
> They are a professional organisation hosting their own server
> and I'm trying
> to get them to steer away from Access, as I think the site
> has the potential
> to get more hits than Access can easily handle. So far they
> are determined
> to stick with it.
>
> I need some ammo... I know Access is not suitable for the job
> they want it
> to do, but I'm not sure of the facts and figures. I think someone
> once before said that Access cannot handle more than 5 concurrent
> users but I'm
> not 100% sure.
>
> So does anyone have any concrete figures on the capabilities
> of Access?
I'm light on concrete figures, but last I checked IMC Online actually
refused to host an Access DB that was larger than 10MB or allow one
on a site that generated more than 2MB of logfiles per day. They
insited on that to maintain server stability, and I certainly don't
blaim them for it. Access is a huge hit on a server compared to a
dedicated SQL Server.
When you add to that Access's occasional spontaneous database
corruption, various leaks in the ODBC drivers.... Access is a huge
headache compared to SQL Server.
Now certainly SQL Server is an expense, but if your client plans to
make money with their site, I'd say SQL Server (or a similar
client-server RDBMS) is almost a requirement.
We've had more than a few clients insist on using Access, only to
come groveling back to us after a year or so when their trafic goes
up and their site suddenly starts dieing.... Not that we complain
too much... We charge hourly to convert the site over to SQL
Server... ;-)
Just to clarify... I'm in no way associated w/ IMC Online, and I'm
not sure whether the restrictions I mentioned are still or ever were
accurate. I have perused IMC's customer support site in the past
when we've hosted various clients there, and I seem to remember
something to the effect of what I quoted above. Don't take it as
Gospel, tho...
Best regards,
Zac Bedell
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use
iQA/AwUBOsN5JavhLS1aWPxeEQKBegCfQb+Gp2qtzBiCyLVqTr3m0E/xuI0AoKW3
u9dMIcmAYYkWFNAqBx+kwk8H
=bXtP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
