A Microsoft Office (Excel, Word) forum. OfficeFrustration

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » OfficeFrustration forum » Microsoft Access » General Discussion
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  

accdb vs adp



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 18th, 2010, 03:28 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
briank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default accdb vs adp

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different
consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's
needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost
effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of
the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate
feedback on this scenario. TY.
  #2  
Old February 18th, 2010, 05:22 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
GBA
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 174
Default accdb vs adp

I seem to be in a minority in believing that the ever increasing power of the
PC, plus that LANs generally are not bandwidth constrained - means that the
requirement to move to sqlserver is pushed further and further away each year.

There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access problem
exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver....
Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away from
sqlserver as most presume growth.

There are several good & valid reasons to move to sqlserver - it is a very
solid product - - so at the same time there would need to be solid reasons to
move away from it. If your organization is running sqlserver routinely for
several other db apps then one would tend to think you should stay with it.

On the otherhand you kind of imply your company is downsizing in various
dimensions - and going strictly PC/LAN environment is certainly more frugal
than managing sqlserver. Fundamentally can Access do the job? that's kind
of yes/no...and then which is less/more painful? managing the exiting
environment vs the effort to downsize it off sqlserver....

Am not sure any generic advice can really assess your situation from a
forum...

"briank" wrote:

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different
consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's
needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost
effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of
the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate
feedback on this scenario. TY.

  #3  
Old February 18th, 2010, 05:55 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
briank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default accdb vs adp

Thank you for your thoughts on this situation. Currently my employee seems
to be firmly in place with using SQL 2005. With this in mind I am now trying
to determine which is best with the SQL connection, either accdb or adp. I
hear opinions supporting each way but I'm trying to determine what factual
evidence is the most swaying. I appreciate any thoughts on this.


"GBA" wrote:

I seem to be in a minority in believing that the ever increasing power of the
PC, plus that LANs generally are not bandwidth constrained - means that the
requirement to move to sqlserver is pushed further and further away each year.

There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access problem
exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver....
Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away from
sqlserver as most presume growth.

There are several good & valid reasons to move to sqlserver - it is a very
solid product - - so at the same time there would need to be solid reasons to
move away from it. If your organization is running sqlserver routinely for
several other db apps then one would tend to think you should stay with it.

On the otherhand you kind of imply your company is downsizing in various
dimensions - and going strictly PC/LAN environment is certainly more frugal
than managing sqlserver. Fundamentally can Access do the job? that's kind
of yes/no...and then which is less/more painful? managing the exiting
environment vs the effort to downsize it off sqlserver....

Am not sure any generic advice can really assess your situation from a
forum...

"briank" wrote:

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different
consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's
needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost
effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of
the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate
feedback on this scenario. TY.

  #4  
Old February 18th, 2010, 11:21 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
Sylvain Lafontaine[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default accdb vs adp

There is no factual evidence. You have said it yourself: you are trying to
follow the code written by four different peoples and above that, maybe that
you'll soon add the code of a fifth person.

Unless the employees at your company are working for free, these kinds of
parameters are much more important than speaking about increasing PC powers
and LAN bandwidth.

There are other considerations as well such as the security and
confidentialiy of your data. Only you can know about how much these other
considerations might be important to your company and they will/might a
great impact on the decision of chosing between either ACCDB or ADP or a
third solution or even a mix of multiple solutions.

--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Windows Live Platform
Blog/web site: http://coding-paparazzi.sylvainlafontaine.com
Independent consultant and remote programming for Access and SQL-Server
(French)


"briank" wrote in message
...
Thank you for your thoughts on this situation. Currently my employee
seems
to be firmly in place with using SQL 2005. With this in mind I am now
trying
to determine which is best with the SQL connection, either accdb or adp. I
hear opinions supporting each way but I'm trying to determine what factual
evidence is the most swaying. I appreciate any thoughts on this.


"GBA" wrote:

I seem to be in a minority in believing that the ever increasing power of
the
PC, plus that LANs generally are not bandwidth constrained - means that
the
requirement to move to sqlserver is pushed further and further away each
year.

There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access
problem
exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it' to sqlserver....
Which is to say the opinion is to move to sqlserver and not move away
from
sqlserver as most presume growth.

There are several good & valid reasons to move to sqlserver - it is a
very
solid product - - so at the same time there would need to be solid
reasons to
move away from it. If your organization is running sqlserver routinely
for
several other db apps then one would tend to think you should stay with
it.

On the otherhand you kind of imply your company is downsizing in various
dimensions - and going strictly PC/LAN environment is certainly more
frugal
than managing sqlserver. Fundamentally can Access do the job? that's
kind
of yes/no...and then which is less/more painful? managing the exiting
environment vs the effort to downsize it off sqlserver....

Am not sure any generic advice can really assess your situation from a
forum...

"briank" wrote:

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have
recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different
consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my
company's
needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost
effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not
sure of
the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would
appreciate
feedback on this scenario. TY.



  #5  
Old February 19th, 2010, 02:52 AM posted to microsoft.public.access
Larry Linson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,112
Default accdb vs adp


"briank" wrote

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different
consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's
needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost
effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure

of
the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate
feedback on this scenario. TY.


At one time, the Access Product Group at Microsoft recommended ADP for
direct connection to SQL Server. That is no longer the case (partly because
the OLEdb technology on which ADP and ADO are based has been supplanted by
successor technology based on ADO.NET -- which shares with classic ADO only
the three initials in its name). The product group now recommends ACCDB or
MDB to link, via ODBC to SQL Server (or other ODBC-compliant server) not
ADP.

Some have liked ADP in the past, but I wouldn't recommend it under the
current set of circumstances.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Office Access MVP




  #6  
Old February 19th, 2010, 02:13 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
briank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default accdb vs adp


Thank you everyone for your feedback.

"briank" wrote:

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have recently
begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by four different
consultants which is a bit of a challenge in itself. Since my company's
needs have changed over the past months I feel that it would be cost
effective to simply create a new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of
the advantages of ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate
feedback on this scenario. TY.

  #7  
Old February 19th, 2010, 07:10 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
David W. Fenton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,373
Default accdb vs adp

=?Utf-8?B?YnJpYW5r?= wrote in
:

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have
recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by
four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in
itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past
months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a
new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of
ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on
this scenario.


For what it's worth, Microsoft has been deprecating ADPs in favor of
MDB/ODBC for the last several years. This is likely to change with
the next version of Access (i.e., the version *after* 2010) because
the Access team has been doing a special project in trying to seek
out users of SQL Server and make Access work better with it. So, I'd
expect ADPs to get new life in Access 15 (ADPs have been basically
ignored in A2007 and A2010, which should tell you something about
how well-implemented they were).

ODBC really is old and creaky, and I really wish ODBC2 would be
created and incorporate the best aspects of ADO. That wouldn't be
..NET-compliant, but it would cover a whole host of issues that come
with using ODBC access to modern databases.

For now, I would not contemplate using an ADP for any purpose. If
the Access team does as stellar a job on improving ADPs as they have
with the A2010 Sharepoint integration, it should be a big hit, and
then become the de facto best choice for development against SQL
Server back ends.

The main flaw for me with that, though, is that it's not back-end
agnostic, which is something I consider important. I'd love to have
the capabilities of an ADP when connecting to MySQL, for instance.
But that would be MS giving up a certain amount of proprietary
advantage. On the other hand, MS has done that with real browser
agnosticism with Sharepoint 2010, so it's possible. But I wouldn't
hold my breath on that one!

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
  #8  
Old February 19th, 2010, 07:15 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
David W. Fenton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,373
Default accdb vs adp

=?Utf-8?B?R0JB?= wrote in
:

There seems to be an overwhelming fixed opinion that if any Access
problem exists it is viewed that the solution is to 'up size it'
to sqlserver.... Which is to say the opinion is to move to
sqlserver and not move away from sqlserver as most presume growth.


I think most often the people recommending SQL Server at the drop of
a hat are Access bigots, i.e., people who really haven't a clue what
they are talking about.

That said, you can find some real Access gurus who don't do
development against anything but SQL Server. However, that may have
more to do with the client base that they work with, i.e., their
clients are in a position to easily administer SQL Server, and have
requirements that make it a no-brainer. I have only a handful of
clients for whom SQL Server is appropriate -- most "microbusinesses"
(as I call small businesses in the 5-10 employees range) have very
little need for what SQL Server offers (though some really small
businesses *do* need the security and reliability and scalability,
because of the nature of their apps and the amount of data being
processes).

SQL Server is certainly no magic bullet. Like any upgrade, it makes
sense to upgrade not just because there's a new version to upgrade
to, but because you have existing problems that the upgrade will
ameliorate or completely resolve. If you can't identify exactly what
problem(s) upsizing will resolve, then there is actually no reason
to upsize.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
  #9  
Old February 19th, 2010, 07:21 PM posted to microsoft.public.access
David W. Fenton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,373
Default accdb vs adp

=?Utf-8?B?YnJpYW5r?= wrote in
:

Thank you for your thoughts on this situation. Currently my
employee seems to be firmly in place with using SQL 2005. With
this in mind I am now trying to determine which is best with the
SQL connection, either accdb or adp. I hear opinions supporting
each way but I'm trying to determine what factual evidence is the
most swaying. I appreciate any thoughts on this.


If you have an existing MDB application, no matter how confusingly
architected, you should stick with it and just fix the problems.
Likely when you understand the code you'll realize it didn't get
convoluted by accident. That is, very often convoluted solutions
reflect a previous developer's struggle and resolution of a complex
problem, and the result will encode a lot of factual information
about the problem being solved. Trashing it and starting over with
an ADP will mean you lose all the knowledge reflected in the code
that's been implemented.

That said, yes, sometimes convoluted code comes about because of a
programmer who simply isn't aware of the better methods. But that
kind of code is usually quite easy to spot and therefore pretty easy
to upgrade to better methods.

If you were starting with new development, I'd say 40/60 likelihood
that ADP is the best choice. After all, MS has been deprecating ADPs
for the last several years, even for new development, with the
exception of reporting apps (which MS says do have certain
performance advantages in ADPs).

But all of this will change 2-3 years from now, with the release of
Access 15, which apparently is going to address the neglect of ADPs
in the last two releases. That isn't enough to convince me that it's
wise to trash an MDB app and replace it with an ADP even then, but
it's worth keeping in mind (i.e., the investment in moving to ADP
could pay off 2 or 3 years down the road; on the other hand, the
Access 15 ADPs could be sufficiently different to make current ADPs
problematic).

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
  #10  
Old February 20th, 2010, 04:14 AM posted to microsoft.public.access
Larry Linson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,112
Default accdb vs adp


"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.82...
=?Utf-8?B?YnJpYW5r?= wrote in
:

I have inherited an A2007 adb with a connection to SS2K5. I have
recently begun trying to follow the various VBA code compiled by
four different consultants which is a bit of a challenge in
itself. Since my company's needs have changed over the past
months I feel that it would be cost effective to simply create a
new db from scratch. However, I am not sure of the advantages of
ADP or simply sticking with ACCDB. I would appreciate feedback on
this scenario.


For what it's worth, Microsoft has been deprecating ADPs in favor of
MDB/ODBC for the last several years. This is likely to change with
the next version of Access (i.e., the version *after* 2010) because
the Access team has been doing a special project in trying to seek
out users of SQL Server and make Access work better with it. So, I'd
expect ADPs to get new life in Access 15 (ADPs have been basically
ignored in A2007 and A2010, which should tell you something about
how well-implemented they were).

ODBC really is old and creaky, and I really wish ODBC2 would be
created and incorporate the best aspects of ADO. That wouldn't be
.NET-compliant, but it would cover a whole host of issues that come
with using ODBC access to modern databases.

For now, I would not contemplate using an ADP for any purpose. If
the Access team does as stellar a job on improving ADPs as they have
with the A2010 Sharepoint integration, it should be a big hit, and
then become the de facto best choice for development against SQL
Server back ends.

The main flaw for me with that, though, is that it's not back-end
agnostic, which is something I consider important. I'd love to have
the capabilities of an ADP when connecting to MySQL, for instance.
But that would be MS giving up a certain amount of proprietary
advantage. On the other hand, MS has done that with real browser
agnosticism with Sharepoint 2010, so it's possible. But I wouldn't
hold my breath on that one!


There may be something "like" an ADP, but ADPs rely on OLEdb and the current
access mechanisms in "real development" (the bigots name for Dot Net stuff)
use something other than OLEdb.

I've worked in very few shops where they had a server back end, in which the
DBA would allow "mere developers" to do design-side work on "the DBA's
server". Yes, they had a very proprietary attitude. No, it wasn't likely to
change.

With small clients, you probably won't face that problem... I suspect that
the fact that Microsoft targets enterprise customers may have something to
do with their "neglect" of ADPs... they found out that many of the wonderful
features they had included were simply prohibited to developers in their
target audience.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Office Access MVP



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 OfficeFrustration.
The comments are property of their posters.