UtterAccess.com
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)

Welcome to UtterAccess! Please ( Login   or   Register )

Custom Search
 
   Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Web Enabled Access, Wiki Talk    
 
   
post Nov 15 2014, 03:20 AM
Post#1



Posts: 0
Joined: --



This topic is designated for discussion of the article: Web Enabled Access.
Go to the top of the page
 
tigerflying
post Nov 15 2014, 03:22 AM
Post#2



Posts: 29
Joined: 21-February 11



My stab at this is that a large majority really wants to use O-365 and will want to pursue the third option, which I quote in full from the article:

“Access Desktop Application with Cloud Based BE: By using a cloud base BE and a Desktop application, we can have the data itself shared globally while retaining the robustness of Desktop applications (including VBA projects). Generally speaking, we can use whatever BE we want in this scenario: Azure, SQL Server, MySQL, Postgres, etc, so long as it's hosted on the cloud somewhere (there's many hosting companies available). A measure of concurrent users is regulated by the BE of choice, but generally speaking any of those mentioned should be able to handle a much larger amount of users than Jet/ACE (eg, much more than a local Access BE)
• Pros:
o Can retain all the robustness of VBA projects
o Relatively easy upgrades from legacy, local/LAN Access applications (as compared to Web Apps/Web Databases, which require a complete rewrite)
o Typically inexpensive, the only cost aside from the usual Desktop application stuff is for hosting the database server, which is usually a trivial monthly/yearly fee.
o Backend can easily be picked up by any other FE major platform (ASP.NET, WPF, WinForms, PHP etc., etc.) and as such has a wide and clear path towards further extensibility.
o Data security implementations are usually good enough for most industry standards
o Users Users Users! You can have lots… most major RDMS Engines handle user concurrency quite well (provided you plan ahead anyway)
• Cons:
o Data Backups are more involved
o Application logic may require a significant overhaul due to the WAN nature of data access. At times, this can be enough to possibly consider a rewrite of major portions of code, though the overall design of the application can at least remain the same.
o Typically requires some use of a fat database to get performance to reasonable levels (e.g., a bit of a learning curve if unfamiliar with database server related scripting)
• Other Notes:
o Performance!!! Many, many people mistakenly assume that a cloud based BE will have terrible performance. While this *can* be true, there's also no reason that we can't have a perfectly adequate performance with a cloud based BE (see note above about overhauling to work well over a WAN). Done properly, an Access FE should be able to have the same speed/feel as a typical web based application (eg, your bank's website, or other such data-driven websites). A friend recently told me that their company has a 3-second limit on form openings: all forms must open in 3 seconds, and I concur, it is doable. 3 second loading on a cloud BE is pretty good, I think. Quite reasonable.
_______________
a few other comments:

-- the first two options (Web App-2013 and Web database-2010) both have “GUI through web browser.” At first I had difficulty imagining what that would be like in the context of an Access db, but then I realized that something like a bank’s website (example given in the wiki) is just that – you login and the bank presents you with a form displaying certain information about, say, your account. You can click on buttons that display other forms that go deeper into one or other aspect. Maybe you can even click on something that will calculate something for you, like the total return to date on some investment you’ve made with the bank. These forms are, of course, on the server, not a part of your browser; and people went to a lot of trouble to create them, so much so that I can’t see this as a viable option for most people who have created Access databases on their laptops over the years and who now want to migrate.

-- the third option, the one quoted at length above, has I believe been referred to elsewhere as a hybrid approach, though in the wiki the only context in which the word “hybrid” occurs is to mean something else: “Hybrid Desktop/Web App Database . . . Keep your existing desktop/LAN database in place, add a Web App separately, and as a feature extension of the original LAN setup, you can connect to this to the Web App's underlying Azure database to interact with that data as well.”

-- in exploring the trial version of O-365, where there is nearly zero info on Access per se, I saw a statement flash by that said something like “Well, if you have a big database you are going to need the 64-bit version of Access.” Yet when you are signing up they make it very difficult to opt for anything other than the 32-bit versions of the Office Suite (and of course the trial version doesn’t even include Access – now the official foster child of the OS). I’d like to know whether this need for 64-bit has any relevance to the options presented in the wiki article and if so what.

-- permissions are very important when the BE is in the cloud – who can do what. A discussion of this would be a useful supplement to the pros and cons of each option in the wiki article.

-- presume that third option entails giving a copy of your FE to every user (or user group) that you want to have access to the Access

-- again third option, why are data backups more involved? The data is just out there in the BE, and Microsoft does the backup of that for you, does it not?

-- third option: “Typically requires some use of a fat database to get performance to reasonable levels . . .” "Some use of" means what?
Go to the top of the page
 
CyberCow
post Nov 17 2014, 01:35 PM
Post#3


UdderAccess Admin + UA Ruler
Posts: 19,555
Joined: 27-April 02
From: Upper MI


QUOTE (tigerflying @ Nov 15 2014, 03:22 AM) *
-- in exploring the trial version of O-365, where there is nearly zero info on Access per se, I saw a statement flash by that said something like "Well, if you have a big database you are going to need the 64-bit version of Access." Yet when you are signing up they make it very difficult to opt for anything other than the 32-bit versions of the Office Suite (and of course the trial version doesn't even include Access – now the official foster child of the OS). I'd like to know whether this need for 64-bit has any relevance to the options presented in the wiki article and if so what.
There is yet to be any reasonable explanation for ever using Access 64-bit. I have not seen one article that succinctly explains why any developer needs to use Access 64-bit. The only advantage I can see to using Access 64-bit is prevent Access 32-bit users from using a 64-bit app. The statement that "if you have a large database you are going to need 64-bit version of Access" is pure malarkey.
Go to the top of the page
 
jleach
post Nov 18 2014, 06:32 AM
Post#4


UtterAccess Editor
Posts: 9,794
Joined: 7-December 09
From: Staten Island, NY, USA


But, people do use 64bit Excel for large processing, and the entire Office bitness must match, so there is valid reason for being forced to use 64bit Access.


That said, the reason I came was to address the "fat database" question. I've made a bunch of links in the article and have created a stub page that explains a fat database: Fat Database
Go to the top of the page
 
tigerflying
post Nov 21 2014, 12:03 AM
Post#5



Posts: 29
Joined: 21-February 11



it sounded like malarkey* to me also, but on the other hand I have W7 64-bit and will be getting Excel/Word/PP 64-bit, so Access 64-bit seems to be in my future. Unless there's some reason of which I am unaware that makes this not a good idea. Cheers


* word origin unknown, but many guess that it comes from SF by the Bay
Go to the top of the page
 
CyberCow
post Nov 21 2014, 04:29 PM
Post#6


UdderAccess Admin + UA Ruler
Posts: 19,555
Joined: 27-April 02
From: Upper MI


Well, usually, I prefer to learn something new without the benefit of having my foot in my mouth.

Tho, with that, I'll thay that thounds wike a weal good weason to uthe Actheth thixty-four bit . . . . blush.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
tigerfly
post Apr 21 2015, 01:17 AM
Post#7



Posts: 22
Joined: 20-April 15



thyber cow's humor (I liked it) seems to have brought this thread to an end, which is too bad because there are still lots of questions here. Perhaps the past five months have filled everyone with pertinent experience which they can now lay on us about the best way to march into Hybridland. I hope so. Particularly if you have actually been trying to develop a hybrid and you can share with us what has gone well and what has been sticky -- or impossible.
Go to the top of the page
 


Custom Search
RSSSearch   Top   Lo-Fi    11th December 2017 - 12:06 PM