No more Microsoft Access :(

[merce33]

I need help.
The manager of the IT department at our company's headquarters up in the United States told me yesterday I am no longer allowed to use access for anything that will be on the server, LAN, internet or intranet. If I use Access, I can only use it on my desktop and it cannot be attached or linked in any way to the network.
He quoted the following reasons:
1. Access can not operate with multiple users at the same time because of record-locking problems.
2. Access takes up too much room on the server and will run too slow.

Here's the thing:
I work in the Quality department of our manufacturing facility in the Dominican Republic. We have 1400 employees here in DR, but no software or programming support. None. we have to go to corporate in the US for that, but it takes months for a project to even get to the top of their to-do list.
So i invested the time to learn access to try and help out the quality department, i did some small databases (all tables less than 5,000 records), they function well -- no problems with record locking -- and everyone uses & likes them. Everyone's happy right?
So that brings us to yesterday when IT in the states heard about the vicious acts i was committing and told me to stop, and that all database development must go through them.
******************
Sorry about the sob-story. Here is my question to the forum:
Is there any data at all that I can gather which will show that a small Access database, used by only 5 or 6 people simultaneously will not incurr any significant performance hits on our network? Or that there is a certain number of simultaneous users under which Access won't have problems? My databases have been used by 3 people at the same time and we haven't noticed any problems.

The thing is, before I had heard of Microsoft Access several months ago, i was doing very similar things on the network with Excel shared-files and VBA. It was a hassle & really inefficient but they I didn't hear so much as a peep from anyone. Now i switch to access instead of excel and i catch hell from the corporate IT manager.

It's a shame, cause i was starting to like Access....

Thanks,
Mike

 

[RompStar]

Well, look into SQL Server 2005, the Express Edition is available for free download and it don't expire, also look into the Management Tools that are Express too and come with it and click on the Learn link or just click here:

There is a total of 13 videos for free, you can watch and quickly get familiar with the product and how it works, how it works on the server and all that, maybe this will help you:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/sql/

 

[Andrew Fergus]

Hi Mike

Unfortunately you have come across uninformed IT prejudice against MS Access. You will find the people in question are either trying to 'protect their patch' or they don't understand MS Access. It is probable there were instances of record locking problems with some of the earlier versions of MS Access but as you have found, a properly designed database does not have these problems. In addition, a properly designed database is not a system resource hog and can function happily over a network.

Unfortunately I don't think this will be a matter of debating facts because the 2 reasons outlined in your post are straight out incorrect. Can you turn it around and ask him for proof given you haven't yet seen the problems he has described? What you have been given are rational (and incorrect) reasons for an irrational decision. I have no doubt (because I have heard this before) IT staff do not like Access databases because they don't want to have to support them once you leave.

Traditionally IT staff regard Access as a 'hobby database' - not to be used for *real* database development and as such they won't have the same level of expertise in this area. And they sort of have a point, because your database wasn't built with the same development methodology, documentation and controls (no offence intended). My counter-argument to that is what about spreadsheets - aren't they in the same category? If not then can the databases be converted to spreadsheets? I believe if you tried to use another database platform (such as SQL server) then you will strike this problem again.

Like I said, I don't believe the facts are going to hold any weight in this argument but if you want to pursue this line then I recommend searching Google or the MS website.

One last option is to outline to the manager (or your manager to get your boss on your side) what the databases are being used for, how long they have been in use, a history of the problems (per the managers list) with the databases (if any), how the impact of turning them off is going to be X, Y and Z and should the affected users contact the IT Manager directly to ask why they can no longer do their job etc etc. If they want to take this on, then let them. Delegate the problem upwards - make it your bosses or the IT managers problem by inundating him with requests. Also, pose the question as to why, in a company with 1400 staff, the IT department have not got local representation on-site to deal with your sites issues - surely 1400 people is enough to warrant some sort of IT presence?

Good luck
Andrew

 

[Sully38]

Hi Mike,

WOW!! This is a rare occurrence I get to reply to a question instead of asking a question. I currently work on three Db that reside on a network and are accessed by multiple people (Up to 10) at all times during the day. Response is almost instant and I can’t ever remember having a record locking issue EVER.

 

[giacomo]

I don't think you're going to get anywhere by debating technology points with the IT director. You need to make it about the needs of the business.

With your database you were able to fill a void that existed in the business. If IT wishes to remove your database from the network I feel there is no point in fighting it. However, their actions have now had an impact on the business, recreating the void that existed prior to your database. If you present your needs for a multi-user system that needs to be built immediately I think they may find that the best thing to do is to put your db back online. You have to remind them that the purpose of the IT department is to support the business, they could have the fastest network in the world but what good is it when the company goes out of business?

Again, what I am saying is make this about QA and not the network. If QA cannot get thier work done, quality suffers, customers look elsewhere, sales take a dive, etc. They cannot argue with that logic, but if you start talking about record locking and all that they will be persieved as being right even if they are wrong... simply because they are in IT and that is their area of expertise.

my 2 cents,
Giacomo

 

[SydneyGeek]

I'm with Giacomo on this one.

I helped a guy on a client site build an Access database to do a job that was being very inefficiently handled by Excel. We got it ready to go, and IT pounced. Access was classified as a "forbidden substance".

We made the case that the database was a business requirement, and got permission to complete the Access version as a prototype. They then put a team from IT onto building a web-based version on a SQL server back end. Rollout is in about 6 weeks, and although it has delayed the use of the database, they will get a good result.

Denis

 

[merce33]

I heeded the advice given.
I had found out that the employee payroll database at our facility is in Access and has been used for 3 years. so you guys were right - debating technical details about access was probably going to get me about as far as 2 cents in a taxi.
I had some discussions with IT about the situation. I just explained to them that the VP of QA receives 13 different excel reports every month. 13 new files x 12 months per year, all taking up space on the server, and he asked me to reduce them into a single, easier-to-understand report. At the time I didn't know corporate IT's stance on Access and local IT down here had just installed access on my computer. So I used the resources that were available and did what was asked of me. I figured part of their stance, even though they didn't say it, was that they didn't want any "rogue software development" of which they weren't aware. After all, i wouldn't want anyone developing any new quality metrics that i did not know about. I promised to work through them on all future projects, and they're even OK with me doing a "scale model" database in access to test concepts initially on a small scale. Thus, I would expect 1 of 2 outcomes after completion of a "scale model" in acces: either 1) they receive a detailed model of what we need which helps speed up their development, or 2) IT is too busy and just decides to let us use the access database for awhile until the project gets to the top of their list.
Either way business needs are met.
One final comment and question: ideally I would like our own software & application development IT department down here, thus not needing to go to corporate for everything. Corporate IT is charged with supporting everything for 7 facilities across the globe, manufacturing sector in DR is normally not too high on their list... How many facilities do you guys know that have 1400 employees and no IT staff beyond 3 people who install software, and set up your PC, monitor, and internet connection?

Thanks again for your opinions & advice.

Mike

 

[giacomo]

ideally I would like our own software & application development IT department down here, thus not needing to go to corporate for everything

have you thought about positioning yourself for that job?