🚀 go-pugleaf

You'll probably get a variety of answers on this depending on the
developer's personal experiences and the hardware configurations they've
worked with.  I have databases with 60,000+ record-tables in the Access
backend running across an NT 4.0 network.  There are a lot of ways to
optimize Access apps for a variety of possible problems, or to clutter them
up and slow them down, so be prepared to distrust any hard and fast
statements about how many records lead to performance degradation.  With
only 16-32 Mb of Ram in your machines, though, you can expect lousy
performance with almost any size of networked Access database, and with
moderate sized local ones if you have any complex queries.  Processor speed
can't carry you through there, you need RAM to crunch those numbers,
although lot's of disk space for a huge swapfile can help.

Performance also depends on what you're doing.  The performance issues are
slightly different between Access 2 and Access 97, but some of the same
bottlenecks exist in both.  A lot of this is largely dependent on
application design however, so a good Access developer can squeeze a lot
more performance out of what he or she builds than can someone who just
migrated from spreadsheets and thinks relational applied to his family
connections.

Charlotte Foust
cfoust@technologist.com



NinkSink wrote in message <35BFC453.3C37EE36@earthlink.net>...
>sake, figure the PC has 16-32Mb of RAM and is a Pentium 133 or better.
>
>I have looked in MS-Access Help, which states the maximum Access database
size is 1Gig,
>but I have a feeling that performance will be subject to slowness long
before the database
>reaches that size.

In article <35BFC453.3C37EE36@earthlink.net>, nutropetfood@earthlink.net (NinkSink) writes:

> Hello all.  A few questions about MS-Access '97 on a Pentium

> Does anyone know a ball-park figure of the max size an MS-Access '97 database can become
> before MS-Access applications have performance and/or data integrity faults.  I would also

I haven't noticed any particular limits, but I've been playing
in the 512MB range in both Access 2.0 and '97 and have been
fairly careful in applying patches and creating indexes to speed
up my queries. If you can avoid table scans, you should be OK.
The data integity problems I was having for a while disappeared
completely once I replaced my SOHO 100TX ethernet card with one
from Bay Networks, go figure!

-- 
Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster@ricochet.net> Spam is irrelevant. Assimilate this:
<ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/softlib/index.txt> Microsoft's master patch list
<ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/softlib/mslfiles/> MS I got yer patch right here!
<http://www.microsoft.com/msdn/>            MS Knowledge Base & more
<http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml>     Usenet search and archival engine
<http://www.altavista.digital.com>          WWW *and* Usenet search engine
WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above        They're   coming  to
because  my cats have  apparently  learned to type.        take me away, ha ha!

My database is 250MB and I keep getting Unrecognized Database Errors all the
time.  It's a pain in the ass.

--

------------------------------------
Scott LaPointe
Internet Outlook Inc.
Tel: (506) 854-0211   Fax: (506) 854-0270
Web: http://www.ioi.nb.ca  Email: ioi@mon.auracom.com
Personal Web: http://www.ioi.nb.ca/scott  Email: scottl@mon.auracom.com


Joe "We are Borg" Foster <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message
11029@bftsi0.UUCP...
>In article <35BFC453.3C37EE36@earthlink.net>, nutropetfood@earthlink.net
(NinkSink) writes:
>
>> Hello all.  A few questions about MS-Access '97 on a Pentium
>
>> Does anyone know a ball-park figure of the max size an MS-Access '97
database can become
>> before MS-Access applications have performance and/or data integrity
faults.  I would also
>
>I haven't noticed any particular limits, but I've been playing
>in the 512MB range in both Access 2.0 and '97 and have been
>fairly careful in applying patches and creating indexes to speed
>up my queries. If you can avoid table scans, you should be OK.
>The data integity problems I was having for a while disappeared
>completely once I replaced my SOHO 100TX ethernet card with one
>from Bay Networks, go figure!
>
>--
>Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster@ricochet.net> Spam is irrelevant. Assimilate
this:
><ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/softlib/index.txt> Microsoft's master patch list
><ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/softlib/mslfiles/> MS I got yer patch right here!
><http://www.microsoft.com/msdn/>            MS Knowledge Base & more
><http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml>     Usenet search and archival
engine
><http://www.altavista.digital.com>          WWW *and* Usenet search engine
>WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above        They're   coming
to
>because  my cats have  apparently  learned to type.        take me away, ha
ha!

Scott LaPointe wrote in message <6pq1ik$sdf$1@news.auaracom.net>...
>My database is 250MB and I keep getting Unrecognized Database Errors all
the
>time.  It's a pain in the ass.
>

There are theoretical limits and then there are real live limits.
Theoretical limits exist in the dreams of microsoft product managers and on
the millions of white papers that microsoft generates every day. Real live
limits are reached WAY before anything you read in any publication. A quick
perusing through this newsgoup ought to tell you that.