IIS vs. SQL
Printed From: Web Wiz Forums
Category: Web Wiz Web App Support Forums
Forum Name: Web Wiz Forums
Forum Description: Support forum for Web Wiz Forums application.
URL: https://forums.webwiz.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=24
Printed Date: 28 March 2026 at 10:23pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.08 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: IIS vs. SQL
Posted By: PsYcHoCoP
Subject: IIS vs. SQL
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 5:19pm
|
Can some one tell me the different ? if sql is better, is it harder to setup ? if no, please link a easy guide ? Currently im running IIS 5 with access ------------- The spelling mistakes has been inserted automatically of consideration to the people who find a great pleasure to search for it 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Bunce
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 5:45pm
|
SQL is a database. IIS is a web server. They aren't alternatives. Cheers, ------------- There have been many, many posts made throughout the world... This was one of them. |
Posted By: PsYcHoCoP
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 6:04pm
|
I know that dude :P just a mistake in the first post :) but i mean with the database connection using web wiz forum SQL or ACCESS what is best ? ------------- The spelling mistakes has been inserted automatically of consideration to the people who find a great pleasure to search for it
|
Posted By: Hawkeye
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 6:11pm
|
I posted a similiar question recently which basically said, "In what cases is SQL preferable over Access". Here's the scoop: SQL is faster. If you're going to be running a large forum (many users, many daily posts), use SQL. However, for a small forum with only around 15 daily posts or so, there isn't much difference (this is according to Borg). Hope this helps.
|
Posted By: Bunce
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 6:18pm
|
SQL SERVER is obvisouly the best as is it a complete RDBMS, but Access is cheaper (free) and will handle A LOT MORE than 15 posts per day. Unless you have a pretty busy site then Access is suitable, if not ideal... Cheers, ------------- There have been many, many posts made throughout the world... This was one of them. |
Posted By: Anilx
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 8:56pm
| Accesss will handle like 100 posts a day..i think it's much more than that but a safe guess! Don't belittle access. Access is part of MS office and MS office ain't free. Access is not a very cheap database but very very very cheap compaared to MS sQl. |
Posted By: michael
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 10:13pm
|
K Access can handle way more posts then 100. My company uses Access for a General Ledger application where some customers easily have 15,000 transactions a day where each transaction has between 5-15 database hits. Access is part of office yes but Access is the application not the database to be exact. The database is Jet and IS free, you can create it with a simple sql statement or so. |
Anilx wrote:Posted By: Bunce
Date Posted: 10 February 2003 at 10:15pm
|
Exactly. And it's STILL CHEAP even as part of Office. ------------- There have been many, many posts made throughout the world... This was one of them. |
Posted By: chatbugs.com
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 12:03am
|
Access can handle many transactions PER MINUTE... SQL however, as long as the server is robust enough, can handle HUNDREDS to THOUSANDS per MINUTE. Its all about volume; not to mention stability. ------------- - Jayson K. Hanes http://chatbugs.com - http://chatbugs.com "bugs" are not just program anomalies anymore :P |
Posted By: doublelfan
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 1:12am
|
The issue is in live hits. If you have too many visitors accessing the db at once you'll run into major problems using access--access was not built for handling heavy loads.
SQL is faster, but we're talking milliseconds here. So if you get few visitors accesing the db at once then don't spend the $ on an sql server. But if you have a lot of traffic, you'll be doing yourself a favor by getting sql. ------------- http://mypcclinic.com/"> 
Free Computer Help 24-7 |
Posted By: Bunce
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 1:22am
|
'Vistors' don't 'access' the database. They make page requests to the web-server. The web-server then creates connections to the database (server), and depending on the coding techniques, uses a pool of connections to the data source. Now the capability of the web-server and database-server, along with the types of transactions, coding techniques, database structure, indexes and yes, amount of traffic in total, can affect the performance of your site. However the hits is not always the detrimental factor. And SQL SERVER, depending on its request *can* be a LOT faster than Access. It all depends on what is requested of it.. Cheers, ------------- There have been many, many posts made throughout the world... This was one of them. |
Posted By: doublelfan
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 1:44am
|
OMG, lol!
Take a chill pill...I realize it isn't some cartoon--people don't run up to the database and knock on the door and ask for info. The question wasn't: explain to me the innerworkings and process of a database and how information is called, it was which db is better. And the answer is simple and my point remains valid. SQL is better for heavy traffic sites and access is more than satisfactory for those who aren't so heavily traveled. Access was not built to handle heavy loads. fin. ------------- http://mypcclinic.com/">
Free Computer Help 24-7 |
Posted By: Bunce
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 4:57am
|
Relax. My point is that it annoys me that people make these overarching comments about Access who really don't understand the inner workings of how a client-server applications work. They've read in some other post or on some other forum that 'Access is slow, SQL Server is fast' and believe its the final word on the matter. Fact is that there are few forums run by those who frequent this message board, that suffer in performance simply because they are using Access. It will be partly due to overpopulated shared hosting services with poor internal bandwidth, server resources, or inadequate website coding. YES, SQL SERVER IS FASTER, but a very small percentage of people realise or utilise its features or power and gain very little from upgrading a previous Access database. And if they do, its usually not only due to ACCESS BEING SLOW! ------------- There have been many, many posts made throughout the world... This was one of them. |
Posted By: PsYcHoCoP
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 5:02am
|
Well i read all these reply, and i can see with my currently forum running at 2 places with access there is no need to upgrade to MySQL. one place i got 220 members with about 2-3 post MAX daily second is much less, but will grow, but still no need for it i guess. btw. im running my own registered w2k server, so its not a big problem getting MySQL installed or is it different tom??? Hope Not ------------- The spelling mistakes has been inserted automatically of consideration to the people who find a great pleasure to search for it
|
Posted By: PsYcHoCoP
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 5:05am
Forget it, i found in another post its different, so i keep my access version LOL  ------------- The spelling mistakes has been inserted automatically of consideration to the people who find a great pleasure to search for it
|
Posted By: Bunce
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 5:09am
|
(BTW, Yes you can install MySQL on Win2K Server. You will also need to use the MyODBC Driver available from www.mysql.com) ------------- There have been many, many posts made throughout the world... This was one of them. |
Posted By: michael
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 9:49am
| And for standard transactions like this forum uses MySQL would probably be faster (Again we are just talking Milliseconds here) though personally I believe in SQL Server being more robust. From what I read, somewhen this year MySQL is supposed to have it's own stored procedures and such so it could become a real alternative for SQL Server. |
Posted By: gr8indianbear
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 10:18am
|
From what i understand SQL Server is also a lot more secure than Access Databases. |
Posted By: Anilx
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 1:46pm
| Yes SQL need username and password to access but the software must be provided with username and password to access. But access is very "not so secure". sQl database also has a better arcitecture. Access was built for so called "small scale" bussiness/ personal use. To sum it up: access is build for small scale use but sQl server is secure, fast, and highly reliable. but your server needs to have it which could cost 1000's of dollars. |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 2:52pm
| Does anybody know any good Hosting Companies that offers MS SQL at a reasonable price? |
Posted By: Anilx
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 4:06pm
|
Since Web Wiz Guide doesn't host my Sql. For MS sQl good hosting company is: http://www.webhost4life.com/hosting.asp - http://www.webhost4life.com/hosting.asp on WIndows. A good Lunux one for My SQL is : http://www.webmasters.com/hosting.htm - http://www.webmasters.com/hosting.htm a five dollar extra fee...great company! |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 4:28pm
| Cheers. What do you think of Web Wiz Guide Hosting? |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 4:47pm
| Has you used webhost4life hosting? |
Posted By: Anilx
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 10:19pm
| hockenpj, no but i had heard great comments about them from my online freinds who has or have had been a customer of them. I run my site on my computer. WebHost4life[ASP on Win 2000 servers] is cheap and reliable. But for MySqL [linux/unix] webmasters.com is good. |
Posted By: Anilx
Date Posted: 11 February 2003 at 10:22pm
| Web Wiz Guide[WWZ] is a small scale bussiness hosting but it very fair and reasonable according to the prices they offer. WWG is notorious for making killer and uncompetable apps which are free. Web Wiz Guide has a great name for making amazing forums. |
Posted By: Shloime
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:05pm
Another rather inexpensive hosting company (big bang for the bucks
sbg
------------- When all is said and done, More will be said, than done... Anon. |
) is http://www.hostdime.com - http://www.hostdime.com . They offer both MSSQL and MySQL on both windows or linux servers. The site(s) i work on are based there. Pretty cool folks to work with. generally, they're very responsive to issues and questions.Posted By: Shloime
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:08pm
|
Has anyone modified the forums app to use mysql? I'm tempted to try. however, i'm not sure exactly where to begin. And if someone has already begun, i'm not sure i want to reinvent this particular wheel. Anyone have any ideas? ------------- When all is said and done, More will be said, than done... Anon. |
Posted By: fernan82
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:14pm
I've heard a few people trying but none has been successful that i know of........ |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:15pm
|
Thanks for the info they look quite good. What would you give them out of 10? |
Posted By: Shloime
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:22pm
|
IMHO - given what you get for what you pay, along with their willingness to work with you to help fix/solve issues, I'd say 8-8.5 out of 10. Now, in the 3 months I've had my site hosted by them, I had 1 major issue, which was a major catastrophe on their part AND on mine. They had 2 servers crash hard (like they threw out these two systems, or so they said!). And I had to revert to an older version of the site, because of backup and generational issues and sheer stupidity on my part. Since then, I haven't had any problems with the site or with them. ------------- When all is said and done, More will be said, than done... Anon. |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:24pm
| Are the Unix hosts? I am looking for Windows 2000 hosting. |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:28pm
| In reply to fernan82 I do not know anybody who has made an SQL version of the Forum. I may start work on it but I am very busy for the moment. I think I might just wait for the official version. |
Posted By: Shloime
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:33pm
|
hostdime has both linux/unix hosts and windows2k hosts. Linux/unix host info can be found at http://www.hostdime.com - http://www.hostdime.com . the win2k stuff can be found at http://www.hostdime.com/windows/ - http://www.hostdime.com/windows/ . Everything I've read from their site indicates a very pro-linux tilt, however, their win2k systems have so far operated flawlessly. ------------- When all is said and done, More will be said, than done... Anon. |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 2:36pm
| Thank you for the info. I will look into it. |
Posted By: Anilx
Date Posted: 12 February 2003 at 5:12pm
For good Linux host try webmasters.com. For a good Windows host use WWG and if you need Sql supported hosting goto http://www.webhost4life.com 
|
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 1:10pm
|
Thanks for the help. I am in the process of transfering my domain to http://www.ukreg.com - http://www.ukreg.com and then I point the domain towards WWG Hosting when I make an account with them. Depending on how current hosts hadle this I may be spilling the dirt about them. |
Posted By: michael
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 1:59pm
|
If you choose a discount host offering SQL Server make sure they are actually running full SQL. Most hosts offer a 30 day money back guarantee or so and once you signed up run a simple query like: which will give you the details. I have found that a few of cheap hosts are running MSDE or Personal Edition which is not enough in a hosting enviroment. I was actually surprised that webhost4life (I am with them) has the Developer Edition running which is not so cheap. The script also lets you know if they applied SP3 on SQL2000 to avoid the Slammer Worm. |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 2:10pm
| Thanks for the info, it will aid me when I am chosing which SQL host I use. |
Posted By: Shloime
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 2:43pm
How can you determine whether the provider is running win2k? I ran the query above without a problem. results were:
servername: Edition ServicePack Version NT Standard Edition SP3 8.00.760
------------- When all is said and done, More will be said, than done... Anon. |
Posted By: michael
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 3:18pm
|
The quickest way to do that is run a quick asp script with something like: |
Posted By: Shloime
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 3:29pm
|
Thanks - I'm still learning this stuff and truly appreciate your help! ------------- When all is said and done, More will be said, than done... Anon. |
Posted By: hockenpj
Date Posted: 13 February 2003 at 4:04pm
|
Can a moderator please delete this post of mine:
|
Posted By: dns-
Date Posted: 16 February 2003 at 1:29am
THANK YOU for sharing this way to querry a Windows server I'm learning about asp & Win2K servers & the code you posted worked for me first time & will prove to be invaluable!
|