Could it be a good idea to share the cloud database and tables with multiple companies to reduce the cost of acquiring cloud databases. The only challenge is supposing the client demand to have a copy of their database what to do then?
Sharing a cloud database and tables with Multiple companies (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter nector
- Start date
- Local time
- Today, 12:37
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 16,613
Risky as company A might get to see data from company B. Plus potentially requirement for different user rights, customisation etc
you might get away with same server, separate databases but suspect the cost saving would be minimal - think azure with costs based around storage volume, processing power and number of transactions. Seem to recall one of the server options is to use a shared server
you might get away with same server, separate databases but suspect the cost saving would be minimal - think azure with costs based around storage volume, processing power and number of transactions. Seem to recall one of the server options is to use a shared server
GPGeorge
Grover Park George
- Local time
- Today, 04:37
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,867
You have to calculate both the cost of the database and the cost of managing the data of multiple organizations securely in a shared database. That's not trivial.
Have you approached potential "data sharing" partners about having one or more unrelated entities seeing and potentially even changing their data? What are their responses? That's what counts, I would think.
AccessBlaster
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 04:37
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 5,953
Share the costs, not the database.
- Local time
- Today, 06:37
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 27,186
You slipped a topic in here that needs to have the obligatory warning: Access doesn't like clouds.
If you COPY a database from a cloud to a local drive (and copy the update back later)... no problem mechanically, though there could be a procedural problem of destructive interference if two copies could be in use at once. "Destructive interference" is based on the old saying "The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing" or "too many cooks spoil the broth."
If you want to share a cloud-resident back-end with multiple users... big problem.
If you COPY a database from a cloud to a local drive (and copy the update back later)... no problem mechanically, though there could be a procedural problem of destructive interference if two copies could be in use at once. "Destructive interference" is based on the old saying "The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing" or "too many cooks spoil the broth."
If you want to share a cloud-resident back-end with multiple users... big problem.
You slipped a topic in here that needs to have the obligatory warning: Access doesn't like clouds.
Here am talking about MS SQL Server provided by win Host which has a total space of 30 GB, now I was thinking of sharing this database in 5 GB for medium enterprises, but for security reasons I have backed off instead I will be offering them the one with 5 GB and bigger companies with 30 GB.
Ms Access will be used as front end, the backend will be the one offered by win host, I have tested their products they are excellent especially for developing countries you cannot go wrong.
Did you know that the tables from their cloud database can be downloaded back to MS Access and back normally either stand alone or local area network backend.
The clients can even backup the actual tables in MS Access database normally.
Here am talking about MS SQL Server provided by win Host which has a total space of 30 GB, now I was thinking of sharing this database in 5 GB for medium enterprises, but for security reasons I have backed off instead I will be offering them the one with 5 GB and bigger companies with 30 GB.
Ms Access will be used as front end, the backend will be the one offered by win host, I have tested their products they are excellent especially for developing countries you cannot go wrong.
Did you know that the tables from their cloud database can be downloaded back to MS Access and back normally either stand alone or local area network backend.
The clients can even backup the actual tables in MS Access database normally.
GPGeorge
Grover Park George
- Local time
- Today, 04:37
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,867
I use WinHost. I can vouch for their service and response to problems. The few times I've ever called on them, I had almost immediate responses and always resolution to problems.
Depending on which of their plans you purchase, you can have as many MS SQL Server databases as you need.
There is no reason, therefore, to consider using a single MS SQL Server database for multiple clients; neither cost, nor performance or nor security would benefit.
That leaves the question raised about overall performance. Appropriate design in the Access interface is the primary factor there. And that's entirely in the developer's hands.
AccessProgrammerLeon
New member
- Local time
- Today, 04:37
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2013
- Messages
- 7
That's really interesting, and glad you shared here.
To connect to WinHost, does it come with encrypted traffic, or do you need a VPN or something like cloudflare ?
Regarding overall performance in the developers hand I agree. Like doing most of the processing on the SQL server using stored procedures and pass through queries. Any other techniques you recommend?
What version of Access do you use to connect to SQL Server ? Office 365 or non cloud office ?
Many thanks
Here am talking about MS SQL Server provided by win Host which has a total space of 30 GB, now I was thinking of sharing this database in 5 GB for medium enterprises, but for security reasons I have backed off instead I will be offering them the one with 5 GB and bigger companies with 30 GB.
Ms Access will be used as front end, the backend will be the one offered by win host
I'm also using winhost I give my clients 2GBs instead of one 30 GB , the problem here is that once a user login he/she will be able to print data for other companies without an issue. However, Winhost has one of the best products especially speed. I'm encouraging everyone to try it
Ms Access will be used as front end, the backend will be the one offered by win host
I'm also using winhost I give my clients 2GBs instead of one 30 GB , the problem here is that once a user login he/she will be able to print data for other companies without an issue. However, Winhost has one of the best products especially speed. I'm encouraging everyone to try it
GPGeorge
Grover Park George
- Local time
- Today, 04:37
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,867
You can configure your connections as required for your application, including encryption.
So far as I know, any version of Access can connect to SQL Server.
The main recommendation as far as designing an Access front end to work with SQL Server is to minimize the amount of traffic between the FE and the BE and to limit the amount of data transferred during any given process. The classic example is the old Access practice of binding a form to a table and then applying a filter to focus on one record. That works okay locally. With a SQL Server BE, the better approach is to bind the form to a filtered query so that no more than the required number of records, i.e. one, is transferred.
