SQL Server verses Sharepoint

[gmg]

I am converting a big Access 2000 Database to Access 2007.
Since Access 2007 no longer has workgroup security, I will also need either
SQL Server or Sharepoint. I have not worked in either before.
Is Sharepoint able to handle large tables and dozens of users the way SQL
Server is?
I also will require Replication. Which one is easier to set up for
replication?
Should I first use SQL Server and then use Sharepoint from SQL Server?
Which would be the easiest way to go?

Thank you

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I am converting a big Access 2000 Database to Access 2007.
Since Access 2007 no longer has workgroup security, I will also need either
SQL Server or Sharepoint.

Actually an A2007 MDB still has ULS. A2007 ACCDBs do not.

However if you have personal data then you should not be using Access
to store the data. Anyone can download the Access back end database
file, take it home and muck with it.

I have not worked in either before.
Is Sharepoint able to handle large tables and dozens of users the way SQL
Server is?

That's debatable. Also Sharepoint does not do relational integrity
and has other flaws.

I also will require Replication. Which one is easier to set up for
replication?

Should I first use SQL Server

Given a choice and you have a more complex system I'd definitely go
with SQL Server.

and then use Sharepoint from SQL Server?

This statement isn't quite valid, To my knowledge you can't really
use Sharepoint from SQL Server. But I sure could be wrong.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
For a free, convenient utility to keep your users FEs and other files
updated see http://www.autofeupdater.com/
Granite Fleet Manager http://www.granitefleet.com/

 

[David W. Fenton]

Since Access 2007 no longer has workgroup security

THIS IS NOT TRUE. It is only the ACCDB format that lacks ULS.

 

[David W. Fenton]

I also will require Replication. Which one is easier to set up for
replication?

Stick with your MDB format and you can use both ULS and Replication
in A2007.

 

[Mariela Sanchez]

I am converting a big Access 2000 Database to Access 2007.
Since Access 2007 no longer has workgroup security, I will also need
either
SQL Server or Sharepoint. I have not worked in either before.
Is Sharepoint able to handle large tables and dozens of users the way SQL
Server is?
I also will require Replication. Which one is easier to set up for
replication?
Should I first use SQL Server and then use Sharepoint from SQL Server?
Which would be the easiest way to go?

Thank you

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Stick with your MDB format and you can use both ULS and Replication
in A2007.

Oh yeah, I missed mentioning that.

Thanks, Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
For a free, convenient utility to keep your users FEs and other files
updated see http://www.autofeupdater.com/
Granite Fleet Manager http://www.granitefleet.com/

 

[gmg]

sorry, I should have made this clearer.
I meant the ACCDB format.
From what I read, the MDB security is flawed and easy to break into, so I
thought I had to convert to ACCDB format and use another security method.

Thanks for your reply

 

[gmg]

I've been reading so much on this subject, I think I'm getting very confused.
Is there a difference between Replication and Sharepoint?
I had thought that the program had to be in the ACCDB format in order to use
Sharepoint. And I thought I needed to use Sharepoint to do Replication.

I would like to use SQL Server but it seems like the learning curve is quite
high. The company that wants this done wants it as soon as possible. If
they go with SQL Server, they want to use SQL Server 2008 Express because
it's free. I'm not sure if it does Replication the way we need to (it only
does Subscriber?)
I'm not sure if I need to recommend to them to buy a version of SQL Server
or just go with Sharepoint.

Thanks for your help

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I've been reading so much on this subject, I think I'm getting very confused.

Is there a difference between Replication and Sharepoint?

Access and SQL Server both have replication as part of their feature
set. Sharepoint has some offline table stuff it can do. Not sure
exactly how similar that is to replication but it's getting close I
think.

I had thought that the program had to be in the ACCDB format in order to use
Sharepoint.

I don't know.

And I thought I needed to use Sharepoint to do Replication.
No.

I would like to use SQL Server but it seems like the learning curve is quite
high. The company that wants this done wants it as soon as possible. If
they go with SQL Server, they want to use SQL Server 2008 Express because
it's free. I'm not sure if it does Replication the way we need to (it only
does Subscriber?)
I'm not sure if I need to recommend to them to buy a version of SQL Server
or just go with Sharepoint.

SharePoint is aimed at a different set of users than Access or SQL
Server. If you want relational integrity and large datasets then you
need SQL Server. Also to upsize a system to using SQL Server is
likely a lot less work than figuring out how to adapt your application
to Sharepoint and how it works.

I should add that while there's a lot of very interesting stuff
happening with Access 2010 and SharePoint, see the MS Access product
group blog for more information, I'd still go with SQL Server for an
internal use application.

Now if this was an app with non employee type of users via the web
then I'd look at Access 2010.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
For a free, convenient utility to keep your users FEs and other files
updated see http://www.autofeupdater.com/
Granite Fleet Manager http://www.granitefleet.com/

 

[gmg]

Thanks for the reply, you've been very helpful

 

[David W. Fenton]

From what I read, the MDB security is flawed and easy to break
into, so I thought I had to convert to ACCDB format and use
another security method.

There is no security in an ACCDB. It's all dependent on the back end
database engine you use.

 

[David W. Fenton]

Access

Strictly speaking, you mean Jet/ACE...

and SQL Server both have replication as part of their feature
set. Sharepoint has some offline table stuff it can do. Not
sure exactly how similar that is to replication but it's getting
close I think.

Sharepoint in the version available now allows synchronization of
data. But it comes at the sacrifice of RI and a number of other
issues with incompatible data types. It also has that dependency on
the Sharepoint server (while it has offline editing, you can't synch
without a Sharepoint server; Jet Replication requires no server at
all).

I don't know.

I don't use either, but my understanding is that ACCDB has the
closest integration with Sharepoint, though I think an MDB can use
Sharepoint lists. But I could be wrong on that.

No.

Sharepoint is not really replication in the sense that Jet offers
replication. And the synching is dependent on the Sharepoint
server's availability.

 

[gmg]

Thanks for all the replies.
We've made the decision to convert to Access 2007 (ACCDB) and use SQL Server
2008
I appreciated getting some expert direction on this.