|
|
Posted by Neil on 11/02/05 20:34
"andy" <aon14@lycos.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1130843576.597061.179990@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> With complex access2 apps I used to increase buffer size. As you're
> pulling a shed load of data at a time that could well speed things up a
> bit. Never tried it but maybe increasing threads would also help.
Sounds like it's worth a try. But there's no way to change it with linked
tables, only with recordsets in code, right?
>
> I would think replacing the way the users are using built in access
> tools with functionality in a front end designed to reduce the amount
> of data pulled is your best bet. This can of course be tricky as you'd
> have to justify work and re-educate people.
I've been throwing around some ideas in my head, and I think we might be
able to do something like that. I think with enough explaining about how it
would work, I might be able to get the users on-board, especially when they
see the performance gains.
>
> The way it works at the moment sounds like you may as well just dump
> the database out of sql server to an access copy overnight then the
> user just copies this across and works off their C drive.
>
No can do. The users are editing as well as viewing. Users need to be able
to edit as well as view data, and see current changes in real-time.
Plus, the database is more than just this one form that brings up all
records in the recordset. There are many reports, functions, and so forth,
all of which use back-end objects or pass-throughs. It's just in this one
area (and primarily because of the way they use Datasheet View) that things
are less than optimum.
Neil
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|