Article View: alt.comp.shareware.programmer
Article #38Re: Excel vs. Access for laboratory data
From: delta
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 00:00
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 00:00
54 lines
3594 bytes
3594 bytes
Brady Kelly wrote: > > On 15 Nov 1997 01:50:15 GMT, "Franz MοΏ½ller" > <franz.mueller@workmail.com> wrote: > > >Hello out there ! > > > >Do you know some good reasons to put (chemical) *laboratory data* in a > >relational database (Access or other, no matter) instead of Excel(-like) > >sheets (which is usualy, as I heared) ? Then please tell me them. I must > >write a programm to process this data and have to argument my choose. > > It depends a lot on your data needs. Excel (or any spreadsheet) is > very good for presenting and manipulating a fixed set of data but is > less suited to data collection or logging. > > If the data has been collected (e.g. from an experiment, or from > external sources of information) and decisions must be made based on > the data 'post-mortem' then Excel is ideal, while Access is much more > suited to an incoming stream of real-time data, of which 'pieces' or > aggregates are presented to a user for decision making. > > Brady Kelly > bkelly@icon.co.za I presently maintain a small expermental access database that contains lab data. I prefer this access to excel because the data is "more" accessable (no pun entended). The reason I called it expermental is that presently all our data is stored in excel and I have been looking at differnet data handling methods in access. The one big discovery is that data normalzation does not work well with the lab data that I handle. If the data is normalized and then displayed in a form in table format the data is not editable. This causes a problem when we are checking data entry and discover an error that must be changed. My work around is to group types of analisis together in one table which when displayed is editable. I have spoke with a good friend of mind that works for HP designing large databases and confirmed my methods. What i truly like about access is that a report (graphs, tables, etc) can be constructed that is usable month after month and with any other data set (job sites). Additionally I can query across sites looking by date and results to see if we have lab problems. I must admit that the graphing engine in execl 5.0c is better than access 2.0. but I would expect that Access 97 engine is improved. Bottom line, store the data in Access, and if you need to manipulate the data unique to that data set, one time only, export to excel. please respond if you have any questions. owen kittredge delta@quiknet.com or owenk@sacramento.deltaenv.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<34764FFF.C66@mail2.quiknet.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<01bcf168$00575ef0$01010101@pluto> <3471e3c7.11853556@news.icon.co.za>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 11431d,db54e125d0e93fda X-Google-Attributes: gid11431d,public X-Google-Thread: fb27f,db54e125d0e93fda X-Google-Attributes: gidfb27f,public X-Google-Thread: 107e7e,db54e125d0e93fda X-Google-Attributes: gid107e7e,public X-Google-Thread: f87f8,db54e125d0e93fda X-Google-Attributes: gidf87f8,public X-Google-Thread: 108717,db54e125d0e93fda X-Google-Attributes: gid108717,public X-Google-Thread: f6ef4,db54e125d0e93fda X-Google-Attributes: gidf6ef4,public From: delta <delta@mail2.quiknet.com> Subject: Re: Excel vs. Access for laboratory data Date: 1997/11/21 Message-ID: <34764FFF.C66@mail2.quiknet.com> X-Deja-AN: 291343166 References: <01bcf168$00575ef0$01010101@pluto> <3471e3c7.11853556@news.icon.co.za> Reply-To: delta@mail2.quiknet.com To: Brady Kelly <bkelly@icon.co.za> Organization: Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. Newsgroups: alt.comp.shareware.programmer,at.tuwien.student,comp.programming,fido.ger.windows.prog,fido7.windows.nt.prog,microsoft.public.excel.programming