August 9, 2011 at 8:56 am
I'm not sure is access is even technically a RDBMS on the back end.
Gregory F, that's a bold statement without providing a framework as to what you might mean by that. Access isn't SQL Server, but most of the basics are still there.
Uebrigens: Sind Sie zufaellig Deutscher? Ich kann zwar sehr gut Deutsch, aber der Satz Ihres Unterschrifts ist mir unklar. Was beudetet es eigentlich?
August 9, 2011 at 8:57 am
I should state that I consider myself to be a developer, not a DBA. My knowledge of SQL, while greatly enhanced over what it was, is no where near the level I feel is needed to be a SQL administrator.
My introduction to SQL was as an "accidental" DBA and during those years I was grateful for the bulletin boards and the sharing of knowledge by those that knew.
I learned T-SQL out of necessity and searched for every "best practice" article I could find to keep the company's system up and running. From there I migrated into upper management and then on into the world of "consulting" or as some would say "self-unemployment" 😛
Today I find myself searching for ways to do things better, faster, easier and when the opportunity arises to share what I have learned over the years with others to help them do the same.
August 9, 2011 at 9:12 am
jd 60382 (8/9/2011)
. . . Today I find myself searching for ways to do things better, faster, easier and when the opportunity arises to share what I have learned over the years with others to help them do the same.
You are in the right place - welcome.
August 9, 2011 at 9:16 am
RonKyle (8/9/2011)
I'm not sure is access is even technically a RDBMS on the back end.
Gregory F, that's a bold statement without providing a framework as to what you might mean by that. Access isn't SQL Server, but most of the basics are still there.
Uebrigens: Sind Sie zufaellig Deutscher? Ich kann zwar sehr gut Deutsch, aber der Satz Ihres Unterschrifts ist mir unklar. Was beudetet es eigentlich?
As I recall, access is not set based, but is cursor based. I remember this from years ago and it may not be true today.
As for the signature, it comes from Beethoven's 9th Symphony, so it's not entirely modern German. My OK-ish German could only be able to translate the foirst parts of it.
Daughter from Elysium,
We enter, drunk with fire,
Into your sanctuary, heavenly (daughter)!
/* ----------------------------- */
Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
August 9, 2011 at 9:17 am
Revenant -- You are in the right place - welcome.
Thank you.
August 9, 2011 at 9:26 am
I stand somewhat corrected, according to Mastering SQL Server 2008, page 508
"...significantly departed from their traditional cursor-based data access technologies of the past. For the first time in Microsoft history users had the capability of working with sets"
Personally, I only consider a DB if it's set-based or Object Oriented (like Versant)
/* ----------------------------- */
Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
August 9, 2011 at 9:50 am
GregoryF (8/9/2011)
I stand somewhat corrected, according to Mastering SQL Server 2008, page 508"...significantly departed from their traditional cursor-based data access technologies of the past. For the first time in Microsoft history users had the capability of working with sets" . . .
This page talks about ADO cursors, not about SQL cursors. Word is the same but in this context denotes an entirely different concept.
August 10, 2011 at 6:29 am
I'm not sure why it would be one or the other. Knowing both can give you a leg up on the competition. A one or the other comparison might be SQL Server vs Oracle since they both require a lot of dedication to learn. I personally dislike Access because it allows amateurs to set up databases that get all messed up. Access users like it because it allows them "develop" an application without in-house expertise. But, that can lead to horrendous design and convoluted code.
August 10, 2011 at 6:44 am
I personally dislike Access because it allows amateurs to set up databases that get all messed up.
I've seen amateurs set up SQL databases. In this case, generally IT staff whose expertise is hardware, so they have access to the SQL Servers.
Again, not saying Access is better; they both have different uses.
August 10, 2011 at 6:51 am
I've worked at a company where a 15TB OLTP database was originally designed in access, ported to SQL7, then upgraded to 2000, 2005. You can really tell from the architecture that it was not designed to handle the traffic volume.
I have never really been a fan of access for anything more than a small db that sits under someone's desk and keeps tracks of names/addresses.
/* ----------------------------- */
Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
August 10, 2011 at 9:28 am
GregoryF (8/10/2011)
. . . I have never really been a fan of access for anything more than a small db that sits under someone's desk and keeps tracks of names/addresses.
Well, that's why it is a component of Office, developed by Office experts, not by Servers and Tools guys.
Viewing 11 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply