🚀 go-pugleaf

Dennis,

The difference is just about everything you described.  SQL does a better,
faster job handling bigger database files, multiple users and running
scripts for automated processes.  In addition, depending on the size of your
db, you will benefit from SQL's database management tools and scripts.  The
only real consideration is cost versus what you want it to do.  If by
"thousands" of records you mean 3 or 4 thousand you are likely okay with
access.  If multiple users are hammering a db with 15k+ records and
performing searches on non-indexed rows,  you are going to see it drag
along.  Cost aside SQL is a cleaner system to admin.  However, if you're
learning curve is going to be a week or two just to manage fewer than 10k
records I wouldn't bother.

Good luck.


--
Ed Hamilton
Applications Developer
Applied Solutions, Inc.
ehamilton@iappliedsolutions.com


"Dennis" <sigma@sigmacontrol.com> wrote in message
news:dZkL5.630$rF4.109591@newshog.newsread.com...
> I have a Access database which has grown much larger than originally
> intended.  I have thousands of entries with up to six (maybe more later)
> different computers (Access applications) accessing the data at any given
> time.  I am also gathering some data automatically and placing it into the
> database which is making it larger.  We have discussed converting the
Access
> database to SQL Server, but we are not sure if that is the correct thing
to
> do.
>
> My question is what is the difference between SQL Server and Microsoft
> Access and when should I use one over the other?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dennis
>
>
>