I'm trying to put together a proposal for my boss that will show why we should 'upsize' our database to SQL Server.
Right now, I've got about 10 or 20 databases that are over 50,000 records (most over 150,000) and they are getting bigger by 1,000 records a week (some are getting larger by 40,000 a month).
I've been looking for documentation as to why SQL is better able to handle the information than Access (we use 97 right now, but will be changing to 2000 by the end of the year [yeah.. my company is a little slow....]). If anyone can point me to documentation about the relative benefits of SQL Server over Access, I'd appreciate it.
GComyn
Right now, I've got about 10 or 20 databases that are over 50,000 records (most over 150,000) and they are getting bigger by 1,000 records a week (some are getting larger by 40,000 a month).
I've been looking for documentation as to why SQL is better able to handle the information than Access (we use 97 right now, but will be changing to 2000 by the end of the year [yeah.. my company is a little slow....]). If anyone can point me to documentation about the relative benefits of SQL Server over Access, I'd appreciate it.
GComyn