Ol!v!é wrote:
> Also, I believe that Access can only work with 25 connections at most,
> while SQL Server can have virtually unlimited connections. Please
> correct me when I'm wrong.

> Also, I believe that Access can only work with 25 connections

> UPDATE table SET column = 'value'
> table contained approx. 7000 records. The packet count for
> this with SQL Server was exactly 9. When using MS Access as

""Ol!v!é"" <stevenlangenaken-at-@hotmail-dot-.com> wrote in message
news:1133407805.181378@seven.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be...
> NickName wrote:
>> Probably this question has been asked hundreds of times and yet net
>> search has not generated satisfactory enough answer, at least, to me.
>> And OK, let's assume your organization has more than 200 employees,
>> just one measure to indicate that it's not small and data processing
>> needs are quite extensive (for both OLTP and OLAP).
>>
>> We've heard so much about concurrency support, stability and
>> performance. Are there any real persuasive paper out there to talk
>> about it? Now, let me also put it in another perspective, say, you're
>> a Microsoft sql server sales guy or gal for that matter for new
>> accounts. What you got?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
> One good reason is that using SQL Server is that the network load is much
> less than compared to using linked tables.
> I've executed the following query from the VBA-Direct window:
> UPDATE table SET column = 'value'
> table contained approx. 7000 records. The packet count for executing this
> with SQL Server was exactly 9. When using MS Access as a backend, the
> packet count was more than 65000.
> Also, I believe that Access can only work with 25 connections at most,
> while SQL Server can have virtually unlimited connections. Please correct
> me when I'm wrong.
> When using the database locally (i.e. not over a network), upgrading to
> SQL Server would be extra overhead imho.
>
> Olivié

NickName wrote:
> Probably this question has been asked hundreds of times and yet net
> search has not generated satisfactory enough answer, at least, to me.
> And OK, let's assume your organization has more than 200 employees,
> just one measure to indicate that it's not small and data processing
> needs are quite extensive (for both OLTP and OLAP).
>
> We've heard so much about concurrency support, stability and
> performance. Are there any real persuasive paper out there to talk
> about it? Now, let me also put it in another perspective, say, you're
> a Microsoft sql server sales guy or gal for that matter for new
> accounts. What you got?
>
> Thanks.
>

david epsom dot com dot au wrote:

>>UPDATE table SET column = 'value'
>>table contained approx. 7000 records. The packet count for
>>this with SQL Server was exactly 9. When using MS Access as
>
>
> None of my clients would let you near their SQL Servers!
>
> If you have your 25 (min) SQL Server users doing updates
> like that, all the real users will be out to lunch while
> they wait for their applications to respond!
>
> Building applications for 25 users means not writing
> queries like that.