Dick,
what if the second table is not local, but another
remote ORacle table. How would the things change in
this case?
Gene
--- Goulet, Dick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, you are misunderstanding it. A simple
statement like your will result in only the data
required being sent over the
Gene,
If all of the tables are remotely linked tables then it should not be too bad.
Things like order by and group by will happen locally though.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 10:10 AM
To: Multiple
recipients of list
ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Sent by: Subject: RE: MS Access as a front-end
to Oracle DB
Hi all:
I have been hearing from many people that MS Access is
bad as a front-end tool because it tends to do data
processing on the clien side instead of the DB side
thus moving way too much data over the network.
Assuming that this is correct, what is the mechanism
of this? If I execute a
I haven't worked with MSAccess to Oracle stuff lately, but
it used to be that the ODBC stuff pulled A LOT of background crap in
addition to what was needed for the query. And, yes, Access did a lot
of the processing locally. The way I got around this was that I either
used passthrough queries
Yes, you are misunderstanding it. A simple statement like your will result in only
the data required being sent over the network. But if you add in a second table
things change, especially if that table is a local access table.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
