MS Access vs SQL Server and others ? Is it worth taking a db server when less than 2 Gb and only 20

Posted by asksuperuser on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by asksuperuser
Published on 2010-05-10T17:58:42Z Indexed on 2010/05/10 18:14 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 200

Filed under:
|
|

After my experiment with MSAccess vs MySQL which shows MS Access hugely overperforming Mysql odbc insert by a factor 1000% before I would do the same experiment with SQL Server I searched for some other's people and found this one:

http://blog.nkadesign.com/2009/access-vs-sql-server-some-stats-part-1/

which says

"As a side note, in this particular test, Access offers much better raw performance than SQL Server. In more complex scenarios it’s very likely that Access’ performance would degrade more than SQL Server, but it’s nice to see that Access isn’t a sloth."

So is worth bother with some db server when data is less than 2 Gb and users are about 20 (knowing that MS Access theorically supports up to 255 concurrent users though practically it's around a dozen concurrent users only).

Are there any real world studies that really compare MS Access with other db in these specific use case ? Because professionaly speaking I keep hearing people systematically recommend DB server from people who have never used Access just because they think DB Server can only perform better in every case which I used to think myself I confess.

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about ms

Related posts about access