Windows Forum

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Microsoft synchronizer or SQL server?

0 helpful
3 replies

by caser85

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

I think I posted this question earlier about using the Access replication manager that comes with Office 2000 Developer Tools. Well, I need to synchronize 5 databases in different locations throughout California. I ordered the Replication Manager and set it up. It hasn't worked that well. The synchronizer would not replicate changes made to the master all the time. Also, it made all the Primary ID numbers in my database ong (10 numbers). Then it would change the numbers after being updated! What a headache. Anyway, I have pulled the plug on Replication Manager now and am searching for a new solution.

We are a recruiting firm and need to keep 5 offices updated with a central database of candidates and job orders. Here are some suggestions I have heard:

1. Get SQL server -- this is expensive but will get the job done
2. Get Backoffice Server that includes SQl -- this is cheaper and has a lot of goodies included
3. Use Act! software which is good for managing contacts (i heard) and can be updated across enterprise
4. Keep using Replication Manager and figure out a way to make it work well

So what is the best solution for my money? We don't want to spend too much $$$... probably no more than $2000. Is it hard to setup SQL server for my situation and will it run reliable? Thank you in advance for any comments and suggestions.

Casey Meyer
Network Administrator
caser85@hotmail.com

3 replies

by mckaytech

After giving it some thought, this is a tough call. Microsoft's Access database replicator is not an industrial-strength tool and seems to exist mainly for proof-of-concept testing that can later be migrated to a SQL Server for the production environment. A 5-way replication is particularly challenging.

Microsoft's SQL Server is a great product for this type of application and you can use the same Access front-end as you now use, but you will be hard-pressed to meet your cost target by thetime you figure the cost of one server license and however many CALs you need. In round numbers, 50 users on SQL will set you back around $10k for the licenses. Plus the hardware requirements for a SQL Server are not trivial and you would need good WAN connections to handle the ODBC calls across the wire.

Now if you might consider an idea from way out in left field that would do the trick - how about a Web-based solution that included a MySQL database, PHP to format the pages and Apache toserve them to users in all five offices? A company called Abriasoft has a package that is pretty easy to set up and includes all the components mentioned for about $150.

With the other $1,850, you could buy the hardware to set it up on a separate server.

Distributed products like ACT! (or GoldMine)work well also but it likewise would be difficult to meet your cost targets with the numbers of sites and users you need to cover.

paul

This discussion is closed to new replies.