asp - web application - DB ?

Discussion in 'ASP General' started by abcd, Nov 2, 2005.

  1. abcd

    abcd Guest

    I have an asp based web applicaiton and that is targeted to be used by
    intranet users say 10-500 or may be more. Currently, I have prototyped my
    Web application using MS Access as my backend. Can
    somebody justify me that I will get in trouble if I continue to use MS
    Access in this multi connection situation. What other databases like Sybase
    iAnywhere, MS Sql server Express edition, MSDE to be considered for the MS
    Access replacement.

    It will be nice if I get the comparision list somewhere...

    We dont want to spend more amount on databases like SQL Server, Oracle,
    Sybase, also we have minimal expertise who should be able to manage the
    databases.

    Thanks
     
    abcd, Nov 2, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. abcd

    AlanM Guest

    Access can cope with 4 consecutive users, considering that it takes a
    fraction of a second normally to make a request from the DB, that is heaps,
    the 5th user would still get his request but he may have to wait a fraction
    of a second.

    But all the same I would use MSDE it s free and powerful



    "abcd" <> wrote in message
    news:e6wqrR%...
    >I have an asp based web applicaiton and that is targeted to be used by
    >intranet users say 10-500 or may be more. Currently, I have prototyped my
    >Web application using MS Access as my backend. Can
    > somebody justify me that I will get in trouble if I continue to use MS
    > Access in this multi connection situation. What other databases like
    > Sybase iAnywhere, MS Sql server Express edition, MSDE to be considered for
    > the MS Access replacement.
    >
    > It will be nice if I get the comparision list somewhere...
    >
    > We dont want to spend more amount on databases like SQL Server, Oracle,
    > Sybase, also we have minimal expertise who should be able to manage the
    > databases.
    >
    > Thanks
    >
     
    AlanM, Nov 3, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. AlanM wrote:
    > Access can cope with 4 consecutive users,


    LOL
    4? Where did you get this number?
    Try making this claim in an Access newsgroup and see what response you get.
    :)

    > considering that it takes a
    > fraction of a second normally to make a request from the DB, that is
    > heaps, the 5th user would still get his request but he may have to
    > wait a fraction of a second.
    >
    > But all the same I would use MSDE it s free and powerful
    >


    No argument. It is HARD to write an application that handles that many users
    using Access on the backend. Possible, but hard. You have to do everything
    correctly - no room for error at all.

    The only issue with MSDE is that it is intended to be used as a development
    platform and threfore has built-in throttling to slow down the response when
    too many concurrent threads are running (the exact number that initiates the
    throttling is hotly debated. I've seen claims of anywhere from 5 to 10.
    There are factors that can affect this number)

    A better answer is to wait a couple weeks and get SQL 2005 Express. it's
    free, and has no throttling restriction.
    >
    > "abcd" <> wrote in message
    > news:e6wqrR%...
    >> I have an asp based web applicaiton and that is targeted to be used
    >> by intranet users say 10-500 or may be more. Currently, I have
    >> prototyped my Web application using MS Access as my backend. Can
    >> somebody justify me that I will get in trouble if I continue to use
    >> MS Access in this multi connection situation. What other databases
    >> like Sybase iAnywhere, MS Sql server Express edition, MSDE to be
    >> considered for the MS Access replacement.
    >>
    >> It will be nice if I get the comparision list somewhere...
    >>
    >> We dont want to spend more amount on databases like SQL Server,
    >> Oracle, Sybase, also we have minimal expertise who should be able to
    >> manage the databases.
    >>
    >> Thanks


    --
    Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
    Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
    don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
    "NO SPAM"
     
    Bob Barrows [MVP], Nov 3, 2005
    #3
  4. abcd

    middletree Guest

    > A better answer is to wait a couple weeks and get SQL 2005 Express. it's
    > free, and has no throttling restriction.


    Do you happen to know how many concurrent (not consecutive ;)) connections
    the new SQL Svr Express will allow?
     
    middletree, Nov 3, 2005
    #4
  5. abcd

    AlanM Guest

    "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > AlanM wrote:
    >> Access can cope with 4 consecutive users,

    >
    > LOL
    > 4? Where did you get this number?


    this news group some time ago

    > Try making this claim in an Access newsgroup and see what response you
    > get.



    according to this article it is 10

    http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2195




    > :)
    >
    >> considering that it takes a
    >> fraction of a second normally to make a request from the DB, that is
    >> heaps, the 5th user would still get his request but he may have to
    >> wait a fraction of a second.
    >>
    >> But all the same I would use MSDE it s free and powerful
    >>

    >
    > No argument. It is HARD to write an application that handles that many
    > users using Access on the backend. Possible, but hard. You have to do
    > everything correctly - no room for error at all.
    >
    > The only issue with MSDE is that it is intended to be used as a
    > development platform and threfore has built-in throttling to slow down the
    > response when too many concurrent threads are running (the exact number
    > that initiates the throttling is hotly debated. I've seen claims of
    > anywhere from 5 to 10. There are factors that can affect this number)
    >
    > A better answer is to wait a couple weeks and get SQL 2005 Express. it's
    > free, and has no throttling restriction.



    very interesting



    >>
    >> "abcd" <> wrote in message
    >> news:e6wqrR%...
    >>> I have an asp based web applicaiton and that is targeted to be used
    >>> by intranet users say 10-500 or may be more. Currently, I have
    >>> prototyped my Web application using MS Access as my backend. Can
    >>> somebody justify me that I will get in trouble if I continue to use
    >>> MS Access in this multi connection situation. What other databases
    >>> like Sybase iAnywhere, MS Sql server Express edition, MSDE to be
    >>> considered for the MS Access replacement.
    >>>
    >>> It will be nice if I get the comparision list somewhere...
    >>>
    >>> We dont want to spend more amount on databases like SQL Server,
    >>> Oracle, Sybase, also we have minimal expertise who should be able to
    >>> manage the databases.
    >>>
    >>> Thanks

    >
    > --
    > Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
    > Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
    > don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
    > "NO SPAM"
    >
     
    AlanM, Nov 8, 2005
    #5
  6. AlanM wrote:
    > "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> AlanM wrote:
    >>> Access can cope with 4 consecutive users,

    >>
    >> LOL
    >> 4? Where did you get this number?

    >
    > this news group some time ago
    >
    >> Try making this claim in an Access newsgroup and see what response
    >> you get.

    >
    >
    > according to this article it is 10
    >
    > http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2195
    >
    >
    >


    Again. Try making that claim in an Access newsgroup and see the reaction.
    :)
    Aaron has provided a great resource in aspfaq, and I frequently cite
    articles at that site. But I do not totally agree with his bias against
    Access.

    The "10 user" limit is just a number somebody came up with. There is
    absolutely nothing to back up that claim besides a mention in an article
    (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/154869) on the MS website, an
    article that applies to obsolete versions of Jet. Nowhere will you find
    stress test results that back up this figure.

    It is certainly possible to create a Jet-backend application that handles
    hundreds of users. Of course, it is much more difficult to do than it is
    with a server-based dbrms such as SQL Server. There is absolutely no room
    for error. Everything must be done exactly right, with the goal of
    minimizing the time that a particular user/thread stays connected to the
    database.

    That said, my preference is to use SQL Server if given the choice: stored
    procedures and other performance-enhancing features more than make up for
    the loss of the TRANSFORM...PIVOT crosstab functionality in JetSQL.

    Bob Barrows
    --
    Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
    Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
    don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
    "NO SPAM"
     
    Bob Barrows [MVP], Nov 8, 2005
    #6
  7. abcd

    MyndPhlyp Guest

    "AlanM" <me@pp> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >
    > "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > AlanM wrote:
    > >> Access can cope with 4 consecutive users,

    > >
    > > LOL
    > > 4? Where did you get this number?

    >
    > this news group some time ago
    >
    > > Try making this claim in an Access newsgroup and see what response you
    > > get.

    >
    >
    > according to this article it is 10
    >
    > http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2195


    I am by no means an expert on the subject but I think that limitation of 10
    refers to the 16-bit Jet database engine rather than Access. The ASP FAQ you
    referenced in turn referenced an MS KB article:

    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/154869
     
    MyndPhlyp, Nov 8, 2005
    #7
  8. "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:OdeG%...
    > AlanM wrote:
    >> "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> AlanM wrote:
    >>>> Access can cope with 4 consecutive users,
    >>>
    >>> LOL
    >>> 4? Where did you get this number?

    >>
    >> this news group some time ago
    >>
    >>> Try making this claim in an Access newsgroup and see what response
    >>> you get.

    >>
    >>
    >> according to this article it is 10
    >>
    >> http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2195
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Again. Try making that claim in an Access newsgroup and see the reaction.
    > :)
    > Aaron has provided a great resource in aspfaq, and I frequently cite
    > articles at that site. But I do not totally agree with his bias against
    > Access.
    >
    > The "10 user" limit is just a number somebody came up with. There is
    > absolutely nothing to back up that claim besides a mention in an article
    > (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/154869) on the MS website,
    > an article that applies to obsolete versions of Jet. Nowhere will you find
    > stress test results that back up this figure.

    [snip]

    Actually the "10 user" limit Aaron refers to comes from this article:

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnmsde/html/msdeforvs.asp

    "Jet can support up to 255 concurrent users, but performance of the
    file-based architecture can prevent its use for many concurrent users. In
    general, it is best to use Jet for 10 or fewer concurrent users."

    The article applies to Jet version 4.0.
     
    Chris Hohmann, Nov 9, 2005
    #8
  9. Chris Hohmann wrote:
    > [snip]
    >
    > Actually the "10 user" limit Aaron refers to comes from this article:
    >
    > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnmsde/html/msdeforvs.asp
    >
    > "Jet can support up to 255 concurrent users, but performance of the
    > file-based architecture can prevent its use for many concurrent
    > users. In general, it is best to use Jet for 10 or fewer concurrent
    > users."
    >
    > The article applies to Jet version 4.0.


    Again, nowhere do they back it up with benchmarks, test results, etc. It
    looks like they've just repeated the number from the earlier article.

    I used to repeat this party-line myself, until I got soundly slapped down
    and re-educated in one of the Access lists to which I used to subscribe.

    Yes, I recognize that the file-based architecture can make it difficult to
    support many concurrent users. But it's not impossible.

    --
    Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
    Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
    header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
    quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
     
    Bob Barrows [MVP], Nov 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Chris Hohmann wrote:
    >>

    >
    > Basically, the statement I was attempting to refute, of which I did an
    > admittedly poor job, was the following:
    >
    > 'The "10 user" limit is just a number somebody came up with. There is
    > absolutely nothing to back up that claim besides a mention in an
    > article (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/154869) on the
    > MS website, an article that applies to obsolete versions of Jet.
    > Nowhere will you find stress test results that back up this figure.'
    >
    > There is something to backup the "10 user" limit claim besides the
    > above article. Namely, this article
    > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnmsde/html/msdeforvs.asp)
    > on the MS website, an article that applies to Jet 4.0.
    >

    Noted.

    --
    Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
    Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
    header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
    quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
     
    Bob Barrows [MVP], Nov 9, 2005
    #10
  11. "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:eC$j$...
    > Chris Hohmann wrote:
    >> [snip]
    >>
    >> Actually the "10 user" limit Aaron refers to comes from this article:
    >>
    >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnmsde/html/msdeforvs.asp
    >>
    >> "Jet can support up to 255 concurrent users, but performance of the
    >> file-based architecture can prevent its use for many concurrent
    >> users. In general, it is best to use Jet for 10 or fewer concurrent
    >> users."
    >>
    >> The article applies to Jet version 4.0.

    >
    > Again, nowhere do they back it up with benchmarks, test results, etc. It
    > looks like they've just repeated the number from the earlier article.
    >
    > I used to repeat this party-line myself, until I got soundly slapped down
    > and re-educated in one of the Access lists to which I used to subscribe.
    >
    > Yes, I recognize that the file-based architecture can make it difficult to
    > support many concurrent users. But it's not impossible.
    >
    > --
    > Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
    > Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
    > header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
    > quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
    >


    Basically, the statement I was attempting to refute, of which I did an
    admittedly poor job, was the following:

    'The "10 user" limit is just a number somebody came up with. There is
    absolutely nothing to back up that claim besides a mention in an article
    (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/154869) on the MS website, an
    article that applies to obsolete versions of Jet. Nowhere will you find
    stress test results that back up this figure.'

    There is something to backup the "10 user" limit claim besides the above
    article. Namely, this article
    (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnmsde/html/msdeforvs.asp) on the
    MS website, an article that applies to Jet 4.0.

    You, Aaron and I are in agreement that the claim itself is poorly supported.
    You because you've said so in this thread, I because I am saying so now and
    Aaron because he says as much in his article. From his article;

    'Microsoft doesn't even publish hard numbers; they just use off-hand
    references such as "ten or fewer" and never truly define what they mean by
    "high-concurrency."'
     
    Chris Hohmann, Nov 9, 2005
    #11
  12. Bob Barrows [MVP] wrote:
    > Again, nowhere do they back it up with benchmarks, test results, etc. It
    > looks like they've just repeated the number from the earlier article.
    >
    > I used to repeat this party-line myself, until I got soundly slapped down
    > and re-educated in one of the Access lists to which I used to subscribe.
    >
    > Yes, I recognize that the file-based architecture can make it difficult to
    > support many concurrent users. But it's not impossible.


    I concur. It can even be quite easy.

    I know of ASP applications with Access databases that support thousands
    of users, with hundreds of database requests per hour. Luckily most are
    well-designed. The problems encountered in these systems were not with
    Access per se but primarily with database structure and indexing. These
    systems have been in production several years with no serious throughput
    problems.

    I should note that these applications are scheduled for migration to SQL
    Server and that the migration code review process is more burdensome
    because MSDE was not used as the original database instead of Access.

    Access is easy to use and tempting. But when one uses Access initially,
    a later migration to SQL Server will be more difficult because:
    - migration requires switching databases on a live system. And once you
    switch over to the new database, there's little chance of reverting to
    the old database should problems arise. Instead, any problems must be
    fixed quickly and the situation can be exhausting and tense.
    - migrating from Access to SQL Server may require changes in the ASP
    code. Had MSDE been used initially, the migration would require no
    coding changes and would be almost transparent to users. It _is_
    possible to write applications in a database-independent manner, but few
    apps are written that way.

    So I recommend starting with the database you want to finish with. If
    that's SQL Server then I'd start with that or MSDE, not with Access.

    OTOH if I were selling a software package, I'd opt for an open-source
    database such as PostGreSQL, which is full-featured but free.
     
    Michael D. Kersey, Nov 10, 2005
    #12
  13. abcd

    AlanM Guest

    "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:OdeG%...
    > AlanM wrote:
    >> "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> AlanM wrote:
    >>>> Access can cope with 4 consecutive users,
    >>>
    >>> LOL
    >>> 4? Where did you get this number?

    >>
    >> this news group some time ago
    >>
    >>> Try making this claim in an Access newsgroup and see what response
    >>> you get.

    >>
    >>
    >> according to this article it is 10
    >>
    >> http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2195
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Again. Try making that claim in an Access newsgroup and see the reaction.
    > :)
    > Aaron has provided a great resource in aspfaq, and I frequently cite
    > articles at that site. But I do not totally agree with his bias against
    > Access.
    >
    > The "10 user" limit is just a number somebody came up with. There is
    > absolutely nothing to back up that claim besides a mention in an article
    > (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/154869) on the MS website,
    > an article that applies to obsolete versions of Jet. Nowhere will you find
    > stress test results that back up this figure.
    >



    Fair enough I stand corrected




    > It is certainly possible to create a Jet-backend application that handles
    > hundreds of users. Of course, it is much more difficult to do than it is
    > with a server-based dbrms such as SQL Server. There is absolutely no room
    > for error. Everything must be done exactly right, with the goal of
    > minimizing the time that a particular user/thread stays connected to the
    > database.
    >
    > That said, my preference is to use SQL Server if given the choice: stored
    > procedures and other performance-enhancing features more than make up for
    > the loss of the TRANSFORM...PIVOT crosstab functionality in JetSQL.
    >
    > Bob Barrows
    > --
    > Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
    > Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
    > don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
    > "NO SPAM"
    >
     
    AlanM, Nov 10, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. James Tsao
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    356
    bruce barker
    Oct 29, 2004
  2. =?Utf-8?B?TVM=?=
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    3,049
    Eliyahu Goldin
    Jan 22, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?SHVzYW0=?=

    From Windows application to ASP.Net Web Application

    =?Utf-8?B?SHVzYW0=?=, Mar 12, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    558
    =?Utf-8?B?SHVzYW0=?=
    Mar 12, 2006
  4. Andy B
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    277
    Andy B
    Aug 13, 2008
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,753
Loading...

Share This Page