Last post Jan 18, 2009 12:25 AM by whighfield
Jan 15, 2009 07:13 AM|Paul Orton|LINK
I am about to begin my first VWD 2008 project but am unsure which database to
use on my website. I would like to use the Access 2003 database that I
am already successfully using in a VB6 application (the web application
will be based on similar data for each website user).
The website will be totally private and accessed by 20-100
managers, each of which is responsible for 50-100 clients. The clients
will also be able to access the website, each one having their data in a
single table and they should be able to edit some of that data
themselves. They will not be able to get at any tables other than their
own. The total number of tables required would therefore be
1,000-10,000 (around 225-2250mb). This could be in a single database or
in 20-100 databases (each with 50-100 tables). Fasthosts say I can
have as many Access databases as I like.
The demands placed on the database(s) would be very light since each
client will only be able to get at a single table - no-one will be
simultaneously trying to alter the same data. Managers will only need to
upload, once a week, updated tables for all of their clients.
Fasthosts tell me that Access databases above about 10mb in size perform
very slowly and recommend using MySQL (well, they would - they
make money from them!).
Does anyone have any advice for me, please?
Jan 15, 2009 08:49 AM|Mikesdotnetting|LINK
Fasthosts tell me that Access databases above about 10mb in size perform very slowly
Nonsense. They have no idea what they are talking about.
Separate databases for each manager might be the easiest way to go, with another separate single database to hold the connection strings and user details in. The only difficulty will be with maintenance, if you need to make a change to databsae schema,
for instance to add or modify functionality.
How many rows do you think each client will have in their table?
Jan 18, 2009 12:25 AM|whighfield|LINK
I would question the database design if there are going to be 1,000-10,000 tables, it sounds like you are making more work for yourself with a design like that.
But anyway back to the question at hand.
FastHost is probably looking at the fact you will have hundreds of databases (files) doing all that file IO and the resources with the connections may impact the web server and ultimately the possible hundreds of other clients on the same server. They are
playing the “I’d rather be safe that sorry card”. Access can scale past 10mb very well with moderate load from a web server, it's probably how you are implementing the web site they are unsure about.