Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file) 
Author Message
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)

Any suggestions / advice ?

We have recently moved from an Access 2.0 development environment to Access
2000.  There are some nice enhancements, but, I find that it is a much
larger, onerous beast to tame.

For example, our main V2 .mdb file was about 3 MB - in Access 2000 this
grows to something between 10 MB and 25 MB.  We continually have to COMPACT
this , but the .MDB then grows and grows - until COMPACTed again.

Also, it seems to take a LOOOONG time in saving an object everytime we make
a change (ie, to a form, report etc...) it may take 30 seconds to save a
simple form (we use a PII 400 Mhz with 128 MB and 13 GB disk with 8 GB free
recently defragged).

Any ideas on the bloating of the .MDB file and the time it takes to save
simple forms / reports ?

John Schlit
Sydney, Australia



Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)
Not having had to start using A2K yet, I can only say what I've heard.

Access 2K is still very much the unfinished product. IMHO opinion, unless
you specifically needed the extra functionality that it offered, you should
have gone to A97.

The longer saving time is due to Access saving the *whole* project rather
than the individual object.

--

HTH

Jon



Quote:
> Any suggestions / advice ?

> We have recently moved from an Access 2.0 development environment to
Access
> 2000.  There are some nice enhancements, but, I find that it is a much
> larger, onerous beast to tame.

> For example, our main V2 .mdb file was about 3 MB - in Access 2000 this
> grows to something between 10 MB and 25 MB.  We continually have to
COMPACT
> this , but the .MDB then grows and grows - until COMPACTed again.

> Also, it seems to take a LOOOONG time in saving an object everytime we
make
> a change (ie, to a form, report etc...) it may take 30 seconds to save a
> simple form (we use a PII 400 Mhz with 128 MB and 13 GB disk with 8 GB
free
> recently defragged).

> Any ideas on the bloating of the .MDB file and the time it takes to save
> simple forms / reports ?

> John Schlit
> Sydney, Australia



Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)
Jet 4.0 is Unicode only, this accounts for a large portion of the base size
increase after converts.  Also, Access 2000 has bloating problems as
reported by several folks in these ngs.,  a solution to which is still
unknown.  Temp queryDefs, SQL etc. are teh reason, from what I understand.

As for the time taken to save the project, as Jon has already pointed out,
it's due to the internal design changes in Access. Access must save the
_entire_ project each time you try to save a changed object, and the save
time required is directly proportional to the number of objects you have in
the datrabase. No workaround, sorry, this is "by design".

I would suggest that you get a hold of Michael Kaplan's article on Access
2000 (Access 2000: Not ready for developers or similar title) that was
published in Access/VB/SQL Advisor (www.advisor.com) some time back. You can
also search www.deja.com for hundreds of posts on why you can't blindly
upgrade to Access 2000.

--
Dev Ashish     (http://www.mvps.org/access)



: Any suggestions / advice ?
:
: We have recently moved from an Access 2.0 development environment to
Access
: 2000.  There are some nice enhancements, but, I find that it is a much
: larger, onerous beast to tame.
:
: For example, our main V2 .mdb file was about 3 MB - in Access 2000 this
: grows to something between 10 MB and 25 MB.  We continually have to
COMPACT
: this , but the .MDB then grows and grows - until COMPACTed again.
:
: Also, it seems to take a LOOOONG time in saving an object everytime we
make
: a change (ie, to a form, report etc...) it may take 30 seconds to save a
: simple form (we use a PII 400 Mhz with 128 MB and 13 GB disk with 8 GB
free
: recently defragged).
:
: Any ideas on the bloating of the .MDB file and the time it takes to save
: simple forms / reports ?
:
: John Schlit
: Sydney, Australia
:
:



Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)
Thanks Jon,

We tried Access 97 a few years ago - but had sooooo many problems that we
decided to stick with good ol' Access 2 - you get used to things working the
way they should and expect the same in newer products.

Also, migrating to a new development environment is not something you want
to do too often, so every now and then one has to take the plunge, eh ?   I
hope the plunge is not too painful - as we have promised our users to have
something ready by May 2000 and we have a big job ahead of us.

John Schilt
Sydney Australia


Quote:
> Not having had to start using A2K yet, I can only say what I've heard.

> Access 2K is still very much the unfinished product. IMHO opinion, unless
> you specifically needed the extra functionality that it offered, you
should
> have gone to A97.

> The longer saving time is due to Access saving the *whole* project rather
> than the individual object.

> --

> HTH

> Jon



> > Any suggestions / advice ?

> > We have recently moved from an Access 2.0 development environment to
> Access
> > 2000.  There are some nice enhancements, but, I find that it is a much
> > larger, onerous beast to tame.

> > For example, our main V2 .mdb file was about 3 MB - in Access 2000 this
> > grows to something between 10 MB and 25 MB.  We continually have to
> COMPACT
> > this , but the .MDB then grows and grows - until COMPACTed again.

> > Also, it seems to take a LOOOONG time in saving an object everytime we
> make
> > a change (ie, to a form, report etc...) it may take 30 seconds to save a
> > simple form (we use a PII 400 Mhz with 128 MB and 13 GB disk with 8 GB
> free
> > recently defragged).

> > Any ideas on the bloating of the .MDB file and the time it takes to save
> > simple forms / reports ?

> > John Schlit
> > Sydney, Australia



Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)



: Thanks Jon,
:
: We tried Access 97 a few years ago - but had sooooo many problems that we
: decided to stick with good ol' Access 2 - you get used to things working
the
: way they should and expect the same in newer products.
:

Actually, Access 97 is the most stable 32 bit release thus far. Access 2
still remains the most stable overall. FWIW

 -- Dev



Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)
Yep, the title is "Access 2000 for Developers: Ready, or Not?" an it was in
the December 1999 issue (the issue before the changed the name from
Access/Office/VB Advisor to Access/VB/SQL Advisor). See

http://www.advisor.com/Articles.nsf/6aad77093e1e84e48825661e006b2704/...
cb53ed0a0882567b300580dbf?OpenDocument

(all on one line)

for info on the article itself. I think you can get copies of the issue from
Advisor?

--
?MichKa
(insensitive fruitarian)

random junk of dubious value, a multilingual website, the
54-language TSI Form/Report to Data Access Page Wizard,
and lots of replication "stuff" at http://www.trigeminal.com/

?

Quote:
> Jet 4.0 is Unicode only, this accounts for a large portion of the base
size
> increase after converts.  Also, Access 2000 has bloating problems as
> reported by several folks in these ngs.,  a solution to which is still
> unknown.  Temp queryDefs, SQL etc. are teh reason, from what I understand.

> As for the time taken to save the project, as Jon has already pointed out,
> it's due to the internal design changes in Access. Access must save the
> _entire_ project each time you try to save a changed object, and the save
> time required is directly proportional to the number of objects you have
in
> the datrabase. No workaround, sorry, this is "by design".

> I would suggest that you get a hold of Michael Kaplan's article on Access
> 2000 (Access 2000: Not ready for developers or similar title) that was
> published in Access/VB/SQL Advisor (www.advisor.com) some time back. You
can
> also search www.deja.com for hundreds of posts on why you can't blindly
> upgrade to Access 2000.

> --
> Dev Ashish     (http://www.mvps.org/access)



> : Any suggestions / advice ?
> :
> : We have recently moved from an Access 2.0 development environment to
> Access
> : 2000.  There are some nice enhancements, but, I find that it is a much
> : larger, onerous beast to tame.
> :
> : For example, our main V2 .mdb file was about 3 MB - in Access 2000 this
> : grows to something between 10 MB and 25 MB.  We continually have to
> COMPACT
> : this , but the .MDB then grows and grows - until COMPACTed again.
> :
> : Also, it seems to take a LOOOONG time in saving an object everytime we
> make
> : a change (ie, to a form, report etc...) it may take 30 seconds to save a
> : simple form (we use a PII 400 Mhz with 128 MB and 13 GB disk with 8 GB
> free
> : recently defragged).
> :
> : Any ideas on the bloating of the .MDB file and the time it takes to save
> : simple forms / reports ?
> :
> : John Schlit
> : Sydney, Australia
> :
> :



Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Size of Access 2000 object (.mdb file)
Just as an FYI,

I have several multi-user dbs several hundred megs with no appreciable loss
of speed.  Front end is typically 30-40 megs linked to 100-200meg backends.
We compact monthly but do not see a noticable loss in size (data increases
only a few megs/month.)

While I agree that the db could be faster, waiting 20secs for a mail merge
to word isnt _that_ bad.

Just my $0.02



Sat, 27 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 7 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Opening Access 97 mdb file with Windows 2000

2. Office 2000 Access MDB File problem

3. CR8.5, VB6 & Access 2000 MDB File

4. VB5 Cannt read Access 2000 mdb files

5. How to use createdatabase make a mdb file for access 2000

6. Save an ADO Recordset to file in Access 2000 mdb format

7. Access Object Browser shows refernce to access mdb file

8. read excel file in access 2000 lire fichier excel dans access 2000

9. deleting and copying access objects between 2 mdb files from VB6

10. Problem opening Access 2000 mdb using ADO

11. Opening Access 2000 mdb using DAO

12. Can VB5 use Access 2000 mdb's?

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software