Migrate to SQL
Experts,
This is a follow up to a similar question
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/28352469/Alternative-to-Access.html
1. If migrating to SQL then all the forms, reports, modules, queries, relationships will be lost? Meaning they do not convert over and will need to be rebuilt in SQL?
2. To me, "migrate" means everything moves over and if not, then the tables are only a very small part of the big picture and I dont see a lot of time being saved with any migration to SQL from Access. You basically have to start over is how I see it.
3. Wouldnt the programmers need to spend a lot of time developing the interface? Meaning that if the IT dept says "yeah well put someone on it" but in reality they dont plan to spend much time developing it then its probably fair to say the interface will not be well done and getting bugs fixed etc etc will be like pulliing teeth. My pt is that the developer can not approach the job carelessly and needs to devote many hours even after the initial interface.
4. If the tables are in SQL then its common to build the interface in SQL as well?
Thank you for the help...
This is a follow up to a similar question
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/28352469/Alternative-to-Access.html
1. If migrating to SQL then all the forms, reports, modules, queries, relationships will be lost? Meaning they do not convert over and will need to be rebuilt in SQL?
2. To me, "migrate" means everything moves over and if not, then the tables are only a very small part of the big picture and I dont see a lot of time being saved with any migration to SQL from Access. You basically have to start over is how I see it.
3. Wouldnt the programmers need to spend a lot of time developing the interface? Meaning that if the IT dept says "yeah well put someone on it" but in reality they dont plan to spend much time developing it then its probably fair to say the interface will not be well done and getting bugs fixed etc etc will be like pulliing teeth. My pt is that the developer can not approach the job carelessly and needs to devote many hours even after the initial interface.
4. If the tables are in SQL then its common to build the interface in SQL as well?
Thank you for the help...
ASKER
Oh I see what you are saying.
I failed to mention that IT does not want to use Access at all.
does this change something?
I failed to mention that IT does not want to use Access at all.
does this change something?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I was under the assumption that SQL is also a FE.
What other FE's are there? .NET is one I can think of.
If we use a different FE other than Access then we are are completely at the mercy of IT is how I see it. I dont want that as it will take too much time to wait on them.
What other FE's are there? .NET is one I can think of.
If we use a different FE other than Access then we are are completely at the mercy of IT is how I see it. I dont want that as it will take too much time to wait on them.
ASKER
(did not see your previous post)
<<
4. If the tables are in SQL then its common to build the interface in SQL as well?
>>
SQL is really just the data, and maybe queries/stored procedures to manipulate it to some degree.
It is NOT a user interface. That is where Access ideally comes back into play, or if that is totally out of the question it would be .Net or something else.
Possible the easiest to transition to if necessary would be VB.Net (but it would not be a straight-forward copy/paste or import, it would be a redesign/rewrite)
EDIT:
Missed your last posts too :)
4. If the tables are in SQL then its common to build the interface in SQL as well?
>>
SQL is really just the data, and maybe queries/stored procedures to manipulate it to some degree.
It is NOT a user interface. That is where Access ideally comes back into play, or if that is totally out of the question it would be .Net or something else.
Possible the easiest to transition to if necessary would be VB.Net (but it would not be a straight-forward copy/paste or import, it would be a redesign/rewrite)
EDIT:
Missed your last posts too :)
ASKER
I am sure they dont want to use Access. They manipulated IT into saying Access is not an approved software. It makes no sense because we were already using Access. What I am dealing with is someone that is above me and is extremely inefficient at what they do and desires to have their name as "author" on something.
1. If migrating to SQL then all the forms, reports, modules, queries, relationships will be lost? Meaning they do not convert over and will need to be rebuilt in SQL?
>>
Not quite...
SQL Server holds your data. Just think of it as a new back-end.
Your Front End (Access) links to the SQL Tables.... with very little change needed to your form/report/query interface.
There are a few things needed - one that comes to mind is that all of your recordset and action query code will need the dbSeeChanges option added.
But for the most part, your FE will remain the same.