Is mdb safe to travel through vpn?

and I heard that you guys were mentioning in this thread that ADP are
superior for forms

so superior for forms + superior for reports = ADP uber alles

go eat a poop sandwich, mdb wimps



On Apr 10, 1:09 pm, "David W. Fenton"
wrote:
"Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote :

A a r o n K e m p f wrote:

ADPs are listed as Microsoft to be 'considerably faster than MDB
for reporting, specifically'

URL?

He's paraphrasing a selective quote, of course. His source is:

http://technet2.microsoft.com/Office...1dce641e-ba1c-
446a-8ff2-221769a58ba51033.mspx?mfr=true

...where it does, in fact, say:

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions. However, there are some scenarios where a report
might be generated significantly faster in an ADP file. . . .

and:

One advantage that ADP files have over files in MDB or ACCDB
format is the ability to make design changes to SQL Server
objects. . . .

But if you read these things in context, you find that they come
after this:

Access uses OLEDB to communicate with SQL Server. To provide the
Jet-like cursor behavior desired for desktop applications, Access
implements the Client Data Manager (CDM) as an additional layer
between Access and OLEDB.

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions. However, there are some scenarios where a report
might be generated significantly faster in an ADP file. To add
these performance improvements and retain the flexibility of SQL
Server, you can build the majority of the application in an MDB or
ACCDB file and have the file load reports from a referenced ADP
file.

So, what is really being said is that reports have a minor advantage
in an ADP, but you'd not want that to be the issue that causes you
to build your whole app as an ADP -- instead, you might use the ADP
for reporting, and the MDB for everything else.

But what he puts in quotation marks is not actually a direct
quotation, and that's telling, because it doesn't actually say
exactly what Aaron is implying with his paraphrased selective quote.

The entire relevant passage:

Access Data Projects (ADPs)

An Access Data Project is an OLE document file, like the .xls
or.doc file formats. It contains forms, reports, macros, VBA
modules, and a connection string. All tables and queries are
stored in SQL Server. The ADP architecture was designed to create
client-server applications. Because of this, there is a limit to
the number of records that Access returns in any recordset. This
limit is configurable, but you typically must build enough
filtering into your application so that you do not reach the
limit.

Access uses OLEDB to communicate with SQL Server. To provide the
Jet-like cursor behavior desired for desktop applications, Access
implements the Client Data Manager (CDM) as an additional layer
between Access and OLEDB.

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions. However, there are some scenarios where a report
might be generated significantly faster in an ADP file. To add
these performance improvements and retain the flexibility of SQL
Server, you can build the majority of the application in an MDB or
ACCDB file and have the file load reports from a referenced ADP
file.

One advantage that ADP files have over files in MDB or ACCDB
format is the ability to make design changes to SQL Server
objects. ADP files include graphical designers for tables, views,
stored procedures, functions, and database diagrams.

Particularly note the first sentence of the third paragraph:

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

David;

and for the record; I just blatantly disagree with this statement:

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions.

BECAUSE OF THE LAYERS INVOLVED IS WHY ADP IS EASIER TO MANAGE

DO YOU KNOW WHAT SQL PROFILER IS?

Does MDB have a SQL Profiler?

It is _EASIER_ to manage ADP than MDB.

I can run a wizard on a database file-- that will 'automagically fix
indexes' based on a workload

you can run a crappy 'Analyze Performance' wizard that doesn't even
_WORK_ for large MDB applications


Your MDB _CRAP_ is laughable at best

what are you still writing connection strings?

Me? I'm a SQL 2005 Certified DBA; and I've worked on 100+ SQL Server
databases these past 5 years

you?

you're a friggin MDB baby

go eat a poop sandwich, MDB wimp!!

On Apr 10, 1:09 pm, "David W. Fenton"
wrote:
"Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote :

A a r o n K e m p f wrote:

ADPs are listed as Microsoft to be 'considerably faster than MDB
for reporting, specifically'

URL?

He's paraphrasing a selective quote, of course. His source is:

http://technet2.microsoft.com/Office...1dce641e-ba1c-
446a-8ff2-221769a58ba51033.mspx?mfr=true

...where it does, in fact, say:

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions. However, there are some scenarios where a report
might be generated significantly faster in an ADP file. . . .

and:

One advantage that ADP files have over files in MDB or ACCDB
format is the ability to make design changes to SQL Server
objects. . . .

But if you read these things in context, you find that they come
after this:

Access uses OLEDB to communicate with SQL Server. To provide the
Jet-like cursor behavior desired for desktop applications, Access
implements the Client Data Manager (CDM) as an additional layer
between Access and OLEDB.

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions. However, there are some scenarios where a report
might be generated significantly faster in an ADP file. To add
these performance improvements and retain the flexibility of SQL
Server, you can build the majority of the application in an MDB or
ACCDB file and have the file load reports from a referenced ADP
file.

So, what is really being said is that reports have a minor advantage
in an ADP, but you'd not want that to be the issue that causes you
to build your whole app as an ADP -- instead, you might use the ADP
for reporting, and the MDB for everything else.

But what he puts in quotation marks is not actually a direct
quotation, and that's telling, because it doesn't actually say
exactly what Aaron is implying with his paraphrased selective quote.

The entire relevant passage:

Access Data Projects (ADPs)

An Access Data Project is an OLE document file, like the .xls
or.doc file formats. It contains forms, reports, macros, VBA
modules, and a connection string. All tables and queries are
stored in SQL Server. The ADP architecture was designed to create
client-server applications. Because of this, there is a limit to
the number of records that Access returns in any recordset. This
limit is configurable, but you typically must build enough
filtering into your application so that you do not reach the
limit.

Access uses OLEDB to communicate with SQL Server. To provide the
Jet-like cursor behavior desired for desktop applications, Access
implements the Client Data Manager (CDM) as an additional layer
between Access and OLEDB.

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions. However, there are some scenarios where a report
might be generated significantly faster in an ADP file. To add
these performance improvements and retain the flexibility of SQL
Server, you can build the majority of the application in an MDB or
ACCDB file and have the file load reports from a referenced ADP
file.

One advantage that ADP files have over files in MDB or ACCDB
format is the ability to make design changes to SQL Server
objects. ADP files include graphical designers for tables, views,
stored procedures, functions, and database diagrams.

Particularly note the first sentence of the third paragraph:

Because of the layers required to get from Access to SQL Server in
the ADP architecture, it is often easier to optimize MDB/ACCDB
file solutions.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/