Max Users, Records for Access

MelB

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 16:40
Joined
Jun 14, 2002
Messages
32
I have been asked to develop an estimate for a call-tracking database. It sounds like it may be too large to be effective using Access and might be better with VB and SQL Server... or a canned package. Does anyone have an recommendations or sources of information that would provide Realistic guideline for the maximum number of concurrent user and max number of records for an efficient MS Access 2000 application??

Thanks in advance...
 
In the AC2K help files, look up key word "Specifications" to see the limits on tables, recordsets, databases, etc. There are several pages that will help you with regard to sizing limits.

With good archiving and call details retirement on a regular basis, and perhaps with links to those archived tables, you could do some pretty good long-term record keeping. By linking to external tables, you can overcome the database total size limitation, but there are still many other limits that would be quite formidable to side-step. I understand your reticence.

We decided long ago that our own call tracking system was going to blow Access capacity out of the water. What helped us decide was that our system had a nearly unlimited number of "touches" for which arbitrarily sized descriptive & narrative fields had to be stored. Problems for us could be forwarded from rep to rep to take advantage of each rep's specialty skills. The detailed call history had to be tracked to help determine cost breakdowns by problem type, caller region, and rep ID. So we finally chose a commercially available package based on an ORACLE server but with a custom front-end. Straight VB, I think, but it's hard to say.

Of course, since our site is part of the U.S. Naval Reserve HQ, our user base and call volume are pretty high. We have at least 20 reps locally on-line 7 x 24 plus maybe another 20 reps during prime shift plus a dozen remote sites that take initial calls and forward them to us for subsequent resolution. So in our case, Access was never going to be adequate.

On the other hand, in a smaller shop, call-tracking isn't so massive a problem. The factors that will define how much storage you will need relate to the number of reps, number of clients or customers, number of times a single call will be referenced with a follow-up reference (if any), the number of possible call topics, level of detail to be tracked in your narratives, and how far back you need to keep things for historical purposes. Good luck in your sizing efforts.
 
Thanks for your response... I have read the 'specifications' section of the help but I have also heard from a lot of less that satisfied users in the last five years that Access has a much lower threshold for acceptable response that those specs indicate.

I was hoping I would get some real life development stories from people who have developed things for say 20 users with 250,000 records on a 10 MB Ethernet LAN that would tell me yes, no problem or don't do it. Maybe twice that or three times... what does anyone thing... what has worked/not worked for you?

Thanks!
 
The volume of data and the transaction rate should dictate the RDBMS that you use for a data store. Access tables are generally a poor choice for high volume multi-user environments. Oracle and DB2 are MUCH better choices. SQL server is a poor third.

As to the front end. Access works very well as a front end to all the major RDBMS' and will work well even for large numbers of users if you put the Access front end db on their desktops.
 
Agree with Pat, with this note:

You might wish to use the security of the underlying database rather than workgroup security in this situation. Or maybe I mean something even stronger than "might wish to use."

ORACLE security is pretty good, has password protection and you can craft various 'roles' that a person can have. If you don't have access to an ORACLE book, read up on workgroups. An Access user is just like an ORACLE user. An Access group is pretty much like an ORACLE role, although roles convey more than just access rights. (They have quotas, query record limits, and some other neat features too.)

Whatever product you choose, avoid the maintenance pitfall that comes with giving rights to individual users. Give the rights to the roles, then grant the roles to the users. Much more efficient. Also, if you have to do a mass change of rights, just muck with the role. If you have to support a new class of user, just copy the closest matching role to a new one and modify that to meet your needs. Down the road, that saves you literal TONS of work.

Gad - here I am recommending a Larry Ellison product to work in concert with a Bill Gates product! What is this world coming to?

:p
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom