When you think that the changes are required?

[prabha_friend]

When you think that the changes are required for an Ms Access Developer to go for an SQL Server Localdb along with accdb files. (side-by-side). Going to localdb only for non-available features in Access.

 

[GPGeorge]

When you think that the changes are required for an Ms Access Developer to go for an SQL Server Localdb along with accdb files. (side-by-side). Going to localdb only for non-available features in Access.

You partially answered your own questions:

"Going to localdb only for non-available features in Access."

Beyond that possible factor, it's impossible to lay down rules for you for your application. Primarily that is because only you know the application you might want to upgrade from accdb back end to SQL Server back end. Only you know where the bottlenecks and pain points are in your application.

Some things that are often mentioned, though, include data security requirements and data size (i.e. the 2 GB limit on accdbs). Again, if those are pertinent to your application, you should consider them.

 

[prabha_friend]

You partially answered your own questions:

"Going to localdb only for non-available features in Access."

Beyond that possible factor, it's impossible to lay down rules for you for your application. Primarily that is because only you know the application you might want to upgrade from accdb back end to SQL Server back end. Only you know where the bottlenecks and pain points are in your application.

Some things that are often mentioned, though, include data security requirements and data size (i.e. the 2 GB limit on accdbs). Again, if those are pertinent to your application, you should consider them.

I thought experts like you must have gone through so many limitation of ms access. Me? My largest App is still reaching 150 MB.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

There are a few reasons why someone would migrate from MS Access to SQL Server.

1. Database approaching 2 GB on a single table (and can't split the table to become multiple tables in mulitple back-end files. i.e.too much data)
2. Need Access front-end but ALSO need a separate web interface.
3. Number of concurrent users starting to strain the back-end, usually due to file locking contention issues. (Access vs. SQL Server = different file-locking therefore different load capacity)
4. Need stronger security for the data tables. Access data security has limits of selectivity and can be bypassed with some effort.
5. Starting to get frequent "insufficient resources" or other memory-related errors on the back-end file's host system AND you have already tried to optimize resource usage per other articles in this and other forums. (RARE - usually #1 or #3 occurs first.)
6. You need to exceed 4Kb record size on a table in Access and cannot shrink it any farther. (RARE - usually this signals a bad design that can be fixed by splitting the table. Also, if Access remains as the FE utility, that reason usually means you HAVE to switch to another FE when you switch to SQL Server as the BE.)

 

[GPGeorge]

I thought experts like you must have gone through so many limitation of ms access. Me? My largest App is still reaching 150 MB.

It's not a matter of knowing about limitations. It's a matter of knowing what your current application consists of, what the limitations facing that application and whether Access is capable of addressing those limitations.

Why, indeed, are you considering SQL Server as an alternative in this specific case?

You certainly are nowhere near the size limit at 150 MB. You failed to indicate whether you have multiple users, or whether you want multiple interfaces. The_Doc_Man is right that moving your data from a local accdb to a hosted SQL Server or Azure SQL would support a second, web interface. On the other hand, you specified a "SQL Server Localdb ", which means you intend to put SQL Server on your local computer, ruling out a web interface. So that's not a factor--at least it doesn't appear to be.

In short, general questions elicit general responses. If you do have a specific need, you can explain it and one of the many experts on that specific type of need can offer ideas.

 

[prabha_friend]

Why, indeed, are you considering SQL Server as an alternative in this specific case?

I am looking for a requirement which will kick myself up to higher technologies but that magic doesn't happened yet. For the past 15 years I worked for corporates like a slave. Only Ms Access, Ms Access and Ms Access. Rarely Excel or Outlook automation but never ms word all. Very recently only (7-8 months only) I have attained this state of Nirvana where I can choose what work I wanna do and what Not. Let's hope for a bright and better future.

 

[Isaac]

When you think that the changes are required for an Ms Access Developer to go for an SQL Server Localdb along with accdb files. (side-by-side). Going to localdb only for non-available features in Access.

Why would you use local DB don't you have other users?

 

[Isaac]

I can completely relate to, understand and support the idea that you are basically looking for an excuse to expand your skill set and use new technologies. I say go for it! All you'll do is learn more and become stronger and better

 

[prabha_friend]

Why would you use local DB don't you have other users?

No. So far no distributed computing requirement has come...