• ZC3rr0r@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, to be fair to Access, it’s not like Excel is such a great multi-user database either, now is it? ;-)

      • supercriticalcheese@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well excel nowadays doesn’t have issues with concurrent users if you have office 365 like many companies do.

        At that time it was Access with the files located at a company shared drive, the issue was concurrent writes I believe.

        • filcuk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Better yet, put your access backend to OneDrive to acquire an un-openable, un-deletable file.

          • ZC3rr0r@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I actually ran this setup for a pretty long while without major issues. YMMV but OneDrive is not a terrible way to store a single user database backend if you don’t have a lot of sequential writes going into it in a short timespan.

        • ZC3rr0r@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, but at the time Excel didn’t support concurrency either ;-)

          Anyway, you are correct about the issue with concurrent writes, but that’s only because Access was intended as a single user DB. If you wanted a multi-user DB you should be getting MS SQL server.

          Not saying this product strategy worked (it clearly didn’t, otherwise people would not be using Excel), but that’s how they envisioned it to work.