David
Wot sized surgery are we talking about? I currently run MSDE and have 2
receptionists stations, 2 nurse stations, 4 doctor stations and an
office station all running BP on MSDE on WinXP on the server. I know of
surgeries running larger practices on MSDE. The concurrent connections
are only at the same time and not the number of workstations attached
and how busy they are.
N
DP wrote:
I have been delaying our practices migration from MDW2 to either MDW3
or BP, because of the need for a server type OS on the server.
I found the different forms of Windows, and the different forms of
MS-SQL and the CALs licencing all too much to work out. And expensive !
I spoke with a BP person recently and they said, that because Vista
will not support MSDE, they have introduced support for MS-SQL Express
2005.
While it was very likely that a medium sized practice would hit a wall
with the MSDE concurrent connection govenor, the feeling is that
MS-SQL Express 2005 is much more capable and that most practices
should find this adequate, obviating the need for fancy server style
OS and licencing.
I'm hoping I can run the server on Win 2000/SP4 with MS-SQL Express 2005.
What do you guys think ??
David Pan
----- Original Message ----- From: "Horst Herb"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General Practice Computing Group Talk" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Open Letter to MedTech Global Limited
On Friday 16 February 2007 15:17, Andrew N. Shrosbree wrote:
I share Russel's frustration about being forced to do major upgrades
after
hours. Argus has the same problem, which is caused by a deficiency in
Interbase. There is simply no elegant way to disconnect all users
before
performing tasks as drastic as making structural changes to database
tables. All users of Interbase will face this problem. That means ZMed,
Argus, Medtech, Profile AFAIK. For what it's worth, users of Microsoft
SequelServer don't have this problem
Nor does Postgresql.
At the time when you chose INterbase as server it was probably the
best option
available, with Psotgresql not running well on Windows.
Things have changed since. PostgreSQL runs now equally well on
Windows, has
better libraries available for most languages, is a lot easier to
administrate, and with maybe the exception of Oracle is the safest one
overall to do anything drastic with it while it is in full use (due
to it's
multi-generational approach to changes and write-ahead logging)
With MSSQL you woudl immediately alienate sme of your staunchest
supporters
and exldue a percentage of your already exisiting user base - whereas
Postgresql could be a single-click upgrade option that will prevent
future
problems.
All that said - as long as you don't change table structure beyond
adding
fields while in use (you can do that safely in Postgres), reindex
while in
use (again safe in Postgres), or change trigger procedures while in
use (not
safe in any system, not possible to make safe) there should not
really be a
problem anyway.
Horst
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.0/689 - Release Date:
15/02/2007 5:40 PM
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
