| Author |
Topic |
|
csphard
Posting Yak Master
113 Posts |
 Posted - 2002-09-25 : 15:34:11
|
| My questions is about limitations. When using access with asp how many user can concurrently access the database? Is that 5. Meaning anything over this will cause a problem? |
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-25 : 15:39:41
|
| Yeah, 5 is a good limit. I'm sure it can handle more, but you can't say it will handle more RELIABLY.There's an article here that has more detail:http://www.sqlteam.com/redir.asp?ItemID=5525 |
 |
|
|
Andraax
Aged Yak Warrior
790 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-25 : 15:41:22
|
| That depends on several factors, like the amount of data you read, how many calls to the database you make, how advanced your queries are etc. If you store simple values in tables and fetch them you could have many concurrent users when using access. If you are aiming for something more complex, you might wanna use SQL server if you have many concurrent users. |
|
|
|
TimSinnott
Starting Member
48 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-25 : 21:05:55
|
| Yep, a lot depends on concurrency issues, especially whether many of your users are attempting to edit the same record at the same time.I've had Access 2.0 and Access97 apps with 50, even 100 concurrent users, pounding the daylights out of Access, and Access has performed just fine. It depends a lot on the situation.But a limit of 5 users? No, that's way, way off base.Tim |
|
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-25 : 21:42:04
|
| In an ASP environment, the concept of "concurrent users" becomes a little blurred, especially if ADO connection pooling is used. 50 PEOPLE can hit the web site, but ADO can easily use only 6-7 separate ADO CONNECTIONS to support them. That's the difference; 1 user does not equal 1 connection. 100 users can be supported by 10-12 connections without too much effort. Once you get to that point you'll start to see some performance loss, especially if there is a lot of UPDATE or INSERT activity, and it really starts to head south if you exceed 15-20 connections.Once the data is retrieved to the web page the connection becomes idle or even closes and a lot of the effort against Access is lifted too. If 50 connections were open against an Access database, trust me, there's NO WAY it wouldn't bog down. Locking alone would kill it, even if it's just SELECT operations (unless you use No Locking explicitly)I've had several phone conversations with Microsoft techs about it, and the best any of them gave me was 30 actual concurrent users for Access 97. Several of them were amazed that I was able to have even that many use the database at at one time, and I had to do A LOT of database repairs and compacting. |
|
|
|
TimSinnott
Starting Member
48 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-25 : 22:28:28
|
| And I should have read the question more closely. :/When I said 50 and 100 concurrent users, I wasn't talking ASP, but rather Access front ends on a corporate network, connecting to one Access back end.But I do know that there is a great popular misconception about the power of Access in general. Most people confuse the concepts of "inexpensive" and "weak". Access is inexpensive, but very powerful. If it were priced at $26,000 per copy, it would have a different reputation! ;)Tim |
|
|
|
TimSinnott
Starting Member
48 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-25 : 22:32:31
|
| One other thought -- Can't a person get the MSDE (Microsoft Database Engine) for free now? Isn't it the equivalent back end as SQL Server? And I think if you have Access, you can develop to the MSDE?I'm pretty fuzzy on the MSDE.Tim |
|
|
|
nr
SQLTeam MVY
12543 Posts |
Posted - 2002-09-26 : 07:05:25
|
| Msde is built to slow down if more than 5 connections.==========================================Cursors are useful if you don't know sql.DTS can be used in a similar way.Beer is not cold and it isn't fizzy. |
|
|
|
|
access vs sql