|
Agreed, that is how I use it, only when it makes sense for a specific purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
Not anymore, but up to 15 years ago, it was da sh*t for database "applications"...
Access itself is not used much anymore, but the database file format can still be found in a lot of .NET applications because it's small, single file and doesn't require the presence of an SQL server instance.
And "NO", you shouldn't use it. That time has passed! You don't even need to install it! 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
The code I'm working with is 15 years old and we are using an MDB file, compatible only with Access 97. We really don't have the time to change DB format but it's in the TODO...
It corrupts. Alone. With a single user. And a fixed set of instructions...
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
"When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page." -- Mike Hankey
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: It corrupts. Alone. With a single user. And a fixed set of instructions...
Sounds like a disk IO problem... 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
The software saves hundreds of images and long textual reports daily for years without fail, only the MDB corrupts - probably it is a problem in deletion of records, as usually only the last 30 days are kept in the DB. The fact is that we do nothing wrong... except using the JET engine, that is wrong by definition.
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
"When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page." -- Mike Hankey
|
|
|
|
|
Is the MDB saving the images as blobs, or as references to the image files themselves? IMHO, storage of blobs is tantamount to disaster as they can be spread across data blocks and deletion of a record may stuff the indexing as part of a block still contains active data.
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
No no the images are files and no reference is saved: the MDB saves only a chain of events, all text. Everything is saved on files, I was just explaining why it is not a disk I/O failure.
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
"When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page." -- Mike Hankey
|
|
|
|
|
What software you use, to use MDB files,
compatible with Access 97?
For me it is not possible since Windows 8.
Thank you for hints
Erhy
|
|
|
|
|
We switched form WinXP to Win7 just a few months ago 
It is control software for industrial machinery so we don't need to change often, it was done oly to comply with a BIG customer that wouldn't buy our machines since the cease of support of XP from Microsoft. The change brought us more pain than else since a bunch of drivers existing only for XP ceased to work - and it is specialized hardware, not off-the-shelf.
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
"When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page." -- Mike Hankey
|
|
|
|
|
MDB files are compatible up to at least Access 2010, and probably higher.
|
|
|
|
|
No they are not - a MDB of ours edited with 2003 is no more usable on our machines. Something, somewhere, breaks. We'll fix when we'll change logging operations (it's in the TODO).
Consider that there are 3 tables with no relation between them - it's fugly but that was what the best heads could come up to 15 years ago.
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
"When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page." -- Mike Hankey
|
|
|
|
|
An .mdb file is compatible with Access 2002/2003/2007/2010 - I only use .mdb files.
If it's breaking it's probably a conversion issue, not compatibility. Instead of converting, try copying and pasting the data. Or, upload the data to SQL Server (Express) and then use a make-table query to bring it back to a newly created Access .mdb file.
|
|
|
|
|
Access is a database system - and yes, it's still used. Should you? Probably not.
It's not a bad DB system, and for a single user it works fine, the management system isn't bad, and it's easy to work with from your code.
But...as soon as you move to a multi user environment, it all turns to poo.
Personally, I paid for it as part of Office, but I don't use it - I use SQL Server instead, even for "private" single user (i.e. me) applications. Internally, it uses the same files as Access, but it wraps it in a layer of comforting security.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I remember it been used along time ago for a stores DB (not by me, I was young and DB were the preserve of the gods!!)
But if I want a DB for my app I've always used SQL Compact and lately, LocalDB.
|
|
|
|
|
I've made four highly multi-user applications with Access, three now in use at manufacturing companies. The multi-user part is a challenge. I set these up so that each user gets their own appplication file on their client PC connected to the data file on the server. I've also made an auto-updater file that automatically updates the client PC with the latest files each time the user logs in.
|
|
|
|
|
Same here.
I have an Access based application running my company for 18 years. I think it's ok up to 25 users. If we needed more users I would consider a back end based in SQL Server or Maria DB, but the front end is ok to make quick forms an reports.
Our database is 800Mb and keeps tables with way more of 100k records. Just don't keep LBOs there, try a workaround and everything will be fine.
If I started today I would choose another database engine. But then again, Access is taking care here of an aplication that involves invoicing, suply chain management, payrolls, bookkeeping, Document management, and some sophisticated functions like geolocation, web content management.. .etc
|
|
|
|
|
SPoss wrote: What for?
To upgrade all your legacy .mdb files to the latest version. Not likely, but still no one knows when MS will stop supporting Versions 200x of those.
|
|
|
|
|
Avijnata wrote: no one knows when MS will stop supporting Versions 200x of those.
The trouble is, a lot of MS Access isn't even backwards compatible. We have one database in our office that uses it and tbh I can't wait to find time to replace it.
|
|
|
|
|
My dad uses it.
He worked for many years as a VAT Inspector before becoming an internal auditor for Customs & Excise. This made him a very boring man.
He has a number of Access DBs he has created on his laptop to store his stuff on.
It is perfect for that.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
|
|
|
|
|
This is exactly what the current value of Access is. And it's a very good value!
|
|
|
|
|
I use it only for personal-use databases.
For a production database, or if the number of expected users exceeds 1, I would rather avoid Access' usage.
while (true) {
continue;
}
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, my Name's Guy and I used to be an Access developer.
I used to write applications with Access(Years ago) - most of them were coding horrors.
I would recommend avoiding it.
It presents itself as a quick way top write database based applications without needing to know about good database or good application design.
Sure it looks nice to end-users and persuades them that they can code and create databases - however the chimera of monstrosities that have been birthed by Access would make even Cerberus throw up his dinner and I understand that if there was a modern day Sisyphus, his task would be to fix Access databases and Access applications.
What starts off as a quick and easy application gets added to and after a few years data a business relies on is embedded in a system that hides functionality and makes tracing issues difficult.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
modified 3-Oct-15 4:12am.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with Access isn't as much Access itself, but rather its intended audience.
|
|
|
|
|
That's nicely put!
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone use it? Yes.
Are there valid reasons to use it? Yes, with caveats.
I have heard of it being used by individuals working for charitable organizations when the individual is essentially cut off from field support, ie: they are on their own. Think interval Africa.. really, used by people in Africa without access to the internet for support.
I have seen it used (badly) in a commercial organization by the accounting group because 'someone' thought they knew how to create a database and the attendant code and couldn't be bothered asking the IT department for help.. that would take to long. So, when the database grew to over 5G and couldn't be shrunk and was tied to a particular machine that couldn't be re-imaged, etc... they refused to admit they had erred years before, but reluctantly asked the IT department for help is moving the functionality to SQL Server.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
