Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    Question about ms Access as database for Win2k hosting

    Hello... I have been shopping around for a few days..

    I am looking for Windows hosting with SQL server support and I saw a few offers of hosting companies that offer Microsoft Access instead. One of the is tera-byte.com. I heard good things about them and their sales reps have been decently fast in their response.

    My site doesn't need any transactional stuff.. it's not ecommerce or anything like that. The only thing I would need the database to do is to keep some user information and data from a forum I built myself (nothing complicated or heavyweigth).

    I was wondering: does anyone have any experience using Access as a web database? I mostly worked with SQL and the idea to use Access as a web DB sounds kinda ... wrong.

    is it reliable? how's performance?

    Thank you.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    189
    Access = Newbies DB (small DB's ok, bad searches)
    MySQL = Decent mid sized DB's decent search pretty fast
    SQL = Only real way to go ..

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Boston Metro
    Posts
    345
    The Microsoft Jet engine, which is what runs MS Access is not intended for use as a database backend for the web. Period. You can use it, but it's not made for the task and will return errors or screw up your data.

    MySQL and SQL Server are intended for that purpose. Either would be sufficient for your uses. The only real different is that SQL Server is made by Microsoft and MySQL isn't.
    http://forums.webhostdir.com/
    All your hosts are belong to us

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,687
    MSSQL is recommended for larger sites or sites where you want to access your data faster. Most scripts can run on both Access and MSSQL server such as Snitz Forums. Generally lower priced packages come with Access and higher priced come with MSSQL, however these days mostly all Windows packages have an option for MSSQL server.
    Chris Adams - CEO - Rochen Ltd. - chris (at) rochen (dot) com

    Now offering both US & UK premium business hosting, reseller hosting and managed virtualized services.
    rochen.com | rochen.co.uk | blog.rochen.com | forums.rochen.com | Twitter: @rochenhost

  5. #5
    thank you for your replies

    Your thoughts pretty much match what I thought about Ms Access... I guess I have some more shopping around to do. All the hosting companies out there ask for 40-50 bucks/month for the site and and additional 50 bucks/month for SQL server.

    I work with SQL server and web servers all day and I honestly don't see a reason why they should ask for so much money for SQL server considering that SQL just takes a lot of space on the harddrive. Doesn't require bandwith and doesn't require any special attention, unless it's for high-end web apps, in which case you would use clusters and other nasty stuff like that.

    Maybe they consider SQL a "luxury item" for sites that are running ecommerce.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,687
    Originally posted by Tranceport
    All the hosting companies out there ask for 40-50 bucks/month for the site and and additional 50 bucks/month for SQL server.
    [/b]
    I suggest you take another look


    honestly don't see a reason why they should ask for so much money for SQL server
    It's because of the licensing cost involved with MSSQL server.
    Chris Adams - CEO - Rochen Ltd. - chris (at) rochen (dot) com

    Now offering both US & UK premium business hosting, reseller hosting and managed virtualized services.
    rochen.com | rochen.co.uk | blog.rochen.com | forums.rochen.com | Twitter: @rochenhost

  7. #7
    Avoid using MS Access as your DB of choice if you can help it, regardless of amount of data. MS SQL or MySQL are much better choices in both efficiency and stability.

    Per Microsoft:
    "ASP also supports Microsoft Access as a valid data source. Although the sample Web site and examples in this release use Microsoft Access, we recommend that Microsoft Access be used solely for development purposes and not for production. Microsoft Access was designed as a single-user desktop database, and not for server use. When multiple, concurrent users make requests of a Microsoft Access database, unpredictable results may occur."

    Now since that was published, MS has backed off on that statement a bit -- but the general caveat behind this warning remains.

    Running our own servers, licensing is an issue for us. To license a single installation of MS SQL in a Web environment would have cost $7,500. I can buy ten P4 1.6 GHz 1U servers for that amount. MySQL is, more or less, free.

    In the Linux world, choosing MySQL is a no-brainer. But we run Win2K servers. So we did our due diligence on MySQL and running it in a Windows environment. We compared performance and other issues and finally decided that we should go the MySQL route.

    We put up a separate box for just for databases with a 1 GHz processor, 1 GB or RAM and two 70 GB drives in it that does NOTHING but run MySQL. There is no Web server or anything of any substance running on that box, other than MySQL, and it absolutely FLIES.

    Finally, because we avoided paying the MS ransom for MS SQL, we were able to buy that separate server AND send our lead developer to a full week of MySQL training -- and STILL have come out $4,000 ahead on the price.

    There are few things in this world that I give unconditional recommendation to, and MySQL is one of them.
    I thank my Lord for all His wonderful blessings.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Boston Metro
    Posts
    345
    Originally posted by Tranceport
    thank you for your replies

    Your thoughts pretty much match what I thought about Ms Access... I guess I have some more shopping around to do. All the hosting companies out there ask for 40-50 bucks/month for the site and and additional 50 bucks/month for SQL server.

    I honestly don't see a reason why they should ask for so much money for SQL server considering that SQL just takes a lot of space on the harddrive.
    There are more things that go into determining pricing for a service than just what the resource usage costs are. Licensing, administration, support, are more significant factors. SQL server's license is 10 times that of Access for a single processor machine, and for a dual processor, it's 20 times that of Access. MySQL costs nothing. Administration of a Microsoft environment is also very expensive, primarily due to the security problems and the almost constant updates required. Add in the higher level of support talent needed to handle SQL-related issues, and then you get the equation that determines the cost of providing that particular service.
    http://forums.webhostdir.com/
    All your hosts are belong to us

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •