kbd wrote:
>I have many years experience with several database products: Foxbase,
>FoxPro, MS SQL, Access, Postgresql, AS400 DB2. Compared to any of the
>above Access is a toy. Case in point; in my office we have a product
>which is "multi-user" based upon Access. When the users, there are
>only four of them, start pumping data into the database all at once,
>the product fails. We then contact the vendor then replies with a
>TechNet article from M$ which explains that Access should not be used
>as a multi-user database.
>
>Also, take note many many projects start as just a simple little job
>and then take on a life of their own.
>
>Oh what about security and user management. And what about backups.
>Who is going to hang around until all the users are finished to backup
>the database?
>
>Considering Postgresql is free and actually works. There is no
>decision.
>
>
First, sorry about my bad command in english.
Ok. This is true, but there is a problem when you are developing an
aplication that must be easy to install,
because the person who will probably install the system is a PC user,
not a Software Ingenier neither a DB Admin.
In these cases, postgres, mysql, sql server, ... and other DBMS needs
the interaction with an experimented
person who knows who to install and configure the DBMS for dealing with
the application.
Often, these sceranios, the application could be monouser and
selfinstallable. In these circunstances, Access could be
a option. In 80s, DBase was the poormen database, since 90s is Access.
I kown a lot of comercial applications, that todays uses DBase and
Access database file structures.
Therefore, do you know a better Open Source DBMS than Access, that is
easy to install and integrate with your applications ?
I mean, there is an Open Source DBMS whose features are bettween Access
or DBase and Postgress/MySQL ?
Thanks.
