Quote:
>> Does Microsoft SQL Server (as a database) overcome performance issues?
>> Are there other DB platforms that have better performance than ACCESS?
>As with most everything in life, welcomet to the world of trade-offs. SQL
>Server is certainly faster (4-5 x in our conversion from Access 2.0 to SQL
>6.5) if properly used. There is more to deal with under SQL, including the
>fact that you must now have an NT server, which is not a requirement under
>Access.
Database performance is highly application dependent. Some
applications are interactive while others are heavily batch oriented.
Even batch type application differ in their processing patterns. To
counter these issues, I did lots of testing using both ODBC and stored
procedures to do bill of materials type processing against SQL Server,
Access and Oracle. My conclusion was that performance stinks in this
particular application for all three databases (compared to accessing
flat files with hash indexes).
With ODBC and C++, you can use the same (or similar) code to work with
both Access and SQL Server. This will allow you to defer your
performance concerns until later (or to the customer). Sometimes
performance concerns outweigh the benefits provided by traditional
databases.
PJ
http://www.exemplarsoftware.com