| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 67415 | 2006-03-27 00:38:00 | Database Advice. | Mantis (3703) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 441084 | 2006-03-27 09:26:00 | Not really the fault of FileMaker Pro ... I'd put this down to 1. Management at the company. 2. The guy who programmed it. 3. The users for not speaking up or for changing the scope. 4. not necessarily in that order but 1 should probably stay 1. |
gcarmich (10068) | ||
| 441085 | 2006-03-27 09:31:00 | I have been running an Access DB for 7 years now tracking student data. It has well over 30,000 records and works quickly and effectively. It is often accessed by several people at the same time. I wouldn't say it was easy to learn how to use, but I imagine others aren't either.How many people simultaneously access it though? And wish to edit the same recordset at the same time? The reason I ask is because Access has got record level locking or page level locking available to it, so if one person has a record open, it effectively stops anyone else editing the data in that recordset, in comparison to other databases which have cell level locking. Also - I think MS Access Databases are designed for up to 5 connections (per database) max, or something low like that. It's why most online forums and stuff use a SQL server of sorts - they require an unknown number of similtaneous connections, of which 5 connections usually wouldn't suffice. As for the original question however, We would need it to be able to generate form letters for entries on the database. I can see the justification in using Access - creating a nice little report and everything then just generating the report as you need it. At the end of the day it means if you ever need to change the report layout/edit the font/etc then all you have to do is just edit the report and away you go. |
SilentNight (10027) | ||
| 441086 | 2006-03-27 09:41:00 | Access is good for five people or less, and databases with a small number of records (less than 10,000) and infrequent access by multiple users at once . I've seen Access databases with over 100,000 records and they work fine . Access may not be an industrial strength db but it has its place . Multi user access may not be its forte but it was never designed as a corporate level db . |
dolby digital (5073) | ||
| 441087 | 2006-03-27 19:53:00 | What a good thread, its been interesting reading the differing opinions. Here is a link that gives a good overview of Access en.wikipedia.org A relevent comment from teh article Access does not scale well if data access is via a network, so applications that are used by more than a handful of people tend to rely on a Client-Server based solution such as Oracle, DB2, Microsoft SQL Server, PostgreSQL, MySQL, or MaxDB. |
netchicken (4843) | ||
| 441088 | 2006-03-27 21:53:00 | Most of our Access DB users have read-only access. They can get (view or print) reports and forms and can export data to excel or word. Data input is limited to three people (one main data entry person and two backup people). The database is actually set up as three individual databases. One has only tables of data. One is a read-only user interface and the third is a data-entry interface. The two interface dbs link tabled data to the data db. This enables changes to be fairly easily made to either user interface such as new forms or reports, layout or formatting, without disturbing the data. It also limits access to non-authorised alteration of data. |
andy (473) | ||
| 441089 | 2006-03-27 22:17:00 | phpmyadmin is a web based front end for mysql. | mejobloggs (264) | ||
| 441090 | 2006-03-27 22:26:00 | Nice one Andy. Years ago I worked on a relational databaseon a Unix/Informix system. Initially we allowed virtually open access to a large pool of staff to the main record of personnel, their backgrounds, training and education, personal ratings and aspirations That only lasted for a few weeks as we realised that a large number of the authorised staff thought that they knew better than the original record capture. They modified so much that some of our personnel were no longer recognisable from their database records. Places of birth, ages, educational qualifications all seemed to get modified - and not always to the individual's benefit. So, while giving rank and file the ability to select, view and print various report combinations, only a very select small pool were allowed the ability to modify primary data. | Scouse (83) | ||
| 441091 | 2006-03-27 22:47:00 | Hi Folks - great to see the variety of advice and opinions here. If this were only going to be used for one person, have a look at Microsoft Outlook. Comes as part of the Office suite, which may already be on the PC, and not the same thing as Outlook Express. Already includes a "Contact Manager" (so an address book). By using the Tools / Mail merge option can pick one, some, or all contacts and will feed into Word's mail-merge system. Regards, Martnz |
martnz (271) | ||
| 441092 | 2006-03-28 09:16:00 | Mantis, if you design an Access database take a lesson from Andy - keep your data tables in a separate file from your user interface (i.e. forms). It'll make life much easier if you later decide to use a more robust database solution. Plus, I believe this method gives you a better idea of how databases work. Access, while not always straight forward, is much easier to get a solution up and running with than client-server databases. If neither you nor your friend have much database experience it's probably a good place to start. |
Mickey (9928) | ||
| 441093 | 2006-03-28 10:04:00 | Just to add another opinion (for what it's worth)..... I respectfully disagree that Access is only good for a small small number of records and users with infrequent use. I have built and supported a number of databases over the years using Access - one database I created in 1996 is still going strong and fairly zips along on the faster PC's (it was designed to run on a PC with 16MB of RAM). Another multi-user database had 1.5 million records and provided I didn't design any silly queries, performance was not an issue. Another split database had 20+ users over a network. All of these databases (and more) have performed admirably! Yes there is record locking but many databases have that and irrespective of what other people say, you don't want many users updating the same record at the same time! This is a fundamental low-level control. I suspect those with low opinions of Access have yet to see a database built properly using the tools provided. As Andy stated, databases with a split front and back end are more robust. I can't speak highly enough of Access and having tried other database products, Access is the one for me. It ships standard with Office Pro, most large organisations (that I have worked with) have it, and because it is part of the Office suite the learning curve for new users is not as steep as other brand databases. That said, in the hands of an ID10T user it's a dangerous tool - garbage in, garbage out! I took a different quote from the Wiki article : Skilled software developers and data architects use it to develop powerful, complex application software. Lastly, there are plenty of online resources to help Mantis get started : www.kayodeok.btinternet.co.uk www.mvps.org databases.about.com www.fontstuff.com www.blueclaw-db.com And there a plenty of dedicated online help forums. Andrew P.S. If it just letters you are wanting to send out, have a look at using a mail merge function using Excel and Word. |
andrew93 (249) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||