>server can be a big expense. With huge databases and large number of
>simultaneous accesses they really do a good job, but if their
capacity
>is not used then you've just waisted a grip of money.
Do one of two things:
Pass the cost on to the customer if it's a custom solution...
Buy an NFR copy if you have a reseller Tax ID number from one of the
reseller houses (Ingram, etc.) Note that there are restrictions on how
you can use NFR copies...
>about 6 queries per minute, per process. If you have an ODBC driver
and
>you are using Access which is probably the best in performance
because
>it caches information and can handle a max of 64 simultaneous
processes.
>You now have the capacity to serve about 350 users (peak) per minute.
Memory leaks and I have as yet to see Access perform admirably in any
sort of multiuser environment. Not saying you're wrong, just that I
don't consider Access up to snuff..
>This should give you a good and cheap solution for quite a while, but
if
>you are doing a lot of database intense things then I suggest you buy
a
>SQL server!
Good point no matter how you look at it... if it's a small app and you
can afford to keep a half eye on memory leaks and the like, Access can
do you well. If it's anything larger\heavier, consider SQL. As
mentioned, it's always something you can pass on to the customer
(price, performance...) if it's dedicated just for them...
Oh, and as always, make sure security is up to par...