Ok, I can meet you on everything but price for SQL Server, a few hundred $ is not
gonna get you SQL Server, I'd want about $4000 budgeted for all the SQL Server
Licenses you need, but if ya can splurge, it'll be worth it!
Gregory Harris
Los Angeles Information Technology Agency (ITA)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/30 11:25 AM >>>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C012AF.B60082FC
Content-Type: text/plain
With all of this talk about Access being inadequate for medium to heavy
traffic sites, I'm beginning to rethink my idea of having Access as the
database for my web app. I started developing this app with Access because
it was what I had been using previously for a corporate intranet, and it
always seemed to perform just fine. So far, I'm doing what I can to cache
the queries which don't change very often, and trying to limit the number of
requests the app makes to the database for information. I think that makes
sense for any application with any database. And while I feel that this will
be adequate for development and for a short while after launch, if things go
as I hope they will, I can now (after reading all these *excellent* and
*informative* messages) see Access quickly becoming swamped. :-|
With that in mind, I'd like to begin exploring my options for a more capable
database. I'll be writing code on Windows 98 or NT boxes, with no servers
(database, web or CF) chosen at this point. I would like a database solution
that can handle a respectable (but not necessarily huge) amount of traffic,
but that also:
+ has an GUI somewhat in the fashion of Access. I like to be able to work
with the data in "spreadsheet" fashion, and switch to design view to change
parameters, etc. I guess this requirement is pretty flexible.
+ is not insanely expensive. Is it possible for up to a few hundred US$?
+ won't require me to completely rewrite a large portion of my code. Edit
some queries, etc., sure; rebuild the whole application, no thanks.
+ can import the data that already exists.
+ is simple enough for me to maintain (or learn to maintain) by myself.
+ will support my needs into the future, or at least provide a simple
upgrade path to the Next Great Thing.
I'm sure there are other things I should be considering, but I'm willing to
bet I'll hear about that from y'all shortly... :-)
Thanks,
Matthew
------_=_NextPart_001_01C012AF.B60082FC
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>Alternatives to Access?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>With all of this talk about Access being inadequate =
for medium to heavy traffic sites, I'm beginning to rethink my idea of =
having Access as the database for my web app. I started developing this =
app with Access because it was what I had been using previously for a =
corporate intranet, and it always seemed to perform just fine. So far, =
I'm doing what I can to cache the queries which don't change very =
often, and trying to limit the number of requests the app makes to the =
database for information. I think that makes sense for any application =
with any database. And while I feel that this will be adequate for =
development and for a short while after launch, if things go as I hope =
they will, I can now (after reading all these *excellent* and =
*informative* messages) see Access quickly becoming swamped. =
:-|</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>With that in mind, I'd like to begin exploring my =
options for a more capable database. I'll be writing code on Windows 98 =
or NT boxes, with no servers (database, web or CF) chosen at this =
point. I would like a database solution that can handle a respectable =
(but not necessarily huge) amount of traffic, but that also:</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>+ has an GUI somewhat in the fashion of Access. I =
like to be able to work with the data in "spreadsheet" =
fashion, and switch to design view to change parameters, etc. I guess =
this requirement is pretty flexible.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>+ is not insanely expensive. Is it possible for up to =
a few hundred US$?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>+ won't require me to completely rewrite a large =
portion of my code. Edit some queries, etc., sure; rebuild the whole =
application, no thanks.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>+ can import the data that already exists.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>+ is simple enough for me to maintain (or learn to =
maintain) by myself.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>+ will support my needs into the future, or at least =
provide a simple upgrade path to the Next Great Thing.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I'm sure there are other things I should be =
considering, but I'm willing to bet I'll hear about that from y'all =
shortly... :-)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Thanks,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Matthew</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C012AF.B60082FC--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebarRsts&bodyRsts/cf_talk or send a message
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
