|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Shakopee MN
Posts: 1,293
|
Access DB Upsizing to SQL
A database that I have has reached the limits of Access and while I understand that it can be upsized to SQL I do not know if this is somehting that I should try to handle on my own. I am not versed in SQL.
We do have a server for our group that is running a single app on it, what I need to know is: Assume a group of fifty users, what type of SQL license should I get if we expect to grow to 150 users in a couple of years A current Access 97 DB with a font end and back end portion I am trainable and would like to be able to support this for job security :-). I have a copy of the MS class material for "Implementing a Database on MS SQL Server 7.0" class pack Material No 833BCP" will this be enough or do I need more (I know a hard question to answer)? Can I upgrade and play with this myself if I have a eval copy of SQL 2000? Is here anything else I am not thinking about in my ingnorance? Thanks
__________________
Never Argue With An Idiot. They'll Drag You Down To Their Level And Then Beat You With Experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Professional gadfly
|
A book I have used a lot is Microsoft Access Developer's Guide to SQL Server. It is very helpful for exactly what you are doing.
I knew nothing about databases three years ago, and taught myself everything I know. Moving to SQL Server wasn't as hard as I thought it would be. The biggest challenge is to rethink what you are doing to create stored procedures that will handle the processing on the server side. Doing this properly really speeds things up and takes full advantage of SQL Server. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Shakopee MN
Posts: 1,293
|
doctor,
thank you - I too am completely self taught, I groan when I look at some parts of the database now...... I'll see if I can get my hands on this locally, the reviews on Amazon and BN both speak well of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Professional gadfly
|
Believe me, I've done my fair share of groaning too.
![]() SQL Server is different, so you do have to get used to thinking differently. The good thing about it is once you get things working right, it's a whole lot faster and easier to deal with. Just figure out ways to minimize the data sent over the network through stored procedures. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|