Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsFormsForms ProgrammingQueriesModules / DAO / VBAReports / PrintingMacrosDatabase DesignSecurityConversionImporting / LinkingSQL Server / ADPMultiuser / NetworkingReplicationSetup / ConfigurationDeveloper ToolkitsActiveX ControlsNew UsersGeneral 1General 2
Access DirectoryToolsTutorialsUser Groups
Related Topics
SQL ServerOther DB ProductsMS OfficeMore Topics ...

MS Access Forum / Multiuser / Networking / June 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Archiving Questions

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Diane - 24 Jun 2005 05:47 GMT
I have a complex database on a network that has been in production for 2
years without a hitch (hedges individual loans on a daily basis).  The number
of records (loans) on a daily basis will grow from 500 per day to 10,000 per
day.  

Any recommendations on how to handle this sort of volume.  Clearly
performance takes a serious beating (if it's able to run at all after a
couple of weeks).  

I've been entertaining the idea of creating an archiving routine.  But how
is it helpful to put 10s of thousands of records from one database table to
another?  Any other solutions other than "you can run, but can't hide"

thanks for the help

ps  we will be moving to SQL within the next year, but we need a solution
during the interim.
Damiaan - 24 Jun 2005 12:34 GMT
1) review all indexes and add/remove where necaisarry
2) 356000 records per year in one table is not that much.  It depends also a
bit on the length of your records (if there are a lot of textfields etc...)

Signature

Kind Regards
Damiaan
e: info at dampee.be
w: http://www.dampee.be

>I have a complex database on a network that has been in production for 2
> years without a hitch (hedges individual loans on a daily basis).  The
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> ps  we will be moving to SQL within the next year, but we need a solution
> during the interim.
Diane - 25 Jun 2005 03:17 GMT
i would be thrilled with 356,000, but unfortunately, based on the specs i
gave it works out to 3,650,000 per year (big difference).  also, i've done a
review of all indexes, field lenghts, etc...and all the table are optimized.

> 1) review all indexes and add/remove where necaisarry
> 2) 356000 records per year in one table is not that much.  It depends also a
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> > ps  we will be moving to SQL within the next year, but we need a solution
> > during the interim.
Van T. Dinh - 25 Jun 2005 11:58 GMT
I would certainly move to one of the heavyweight database engine like SQL
Server, etc ...

Signature

HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)

> i would be thrilled with 356,000, but unfortunately, based on the specs i
> gave it works out to 3,650,000 per year (big difference).  also, i've done a
> review of all indexes, field lenghts, etc...and all the table are optimized.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.