How Much Work Is It To Build A Database?

[GasX]

I am constantly troubled by internal politics and the sad reality that building this internally would take at least a year.

I am looking to implement a Database to track my departments workflow and really it would not amount to much more that 4 or 5 linked tables with a few custom reports and data entry screens.

I have a good understanding of how relational databases work, so I would be able to provide very good specs. Building it and making the screens are beyond my skills.

As for what type of DB, I would be perfectly happy with Access. Something a little more powerful that I could handle multiple users would be preferable, but there would never be more than a handful of users and system maintenance would be a pain to arrange.

If anyone could give me a ROUGH guess on what building this would take, I would appreciate it. I recognize that I have not provided a lot of information, but to suffice it to say, I am just fleshing out what would be involved in getting a single competant contractor to crank this out solo with my guidance.

TIA

-Matt

 

[KB]

Access could manage this easily. A good Access person might have it done in a week. You could also use the access upsizing wizard to move the DB to SQL Server.

 

[GasX]

can access handle 2-3 simultaneous users?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Only potential problem with doing this in Access directly would be that

1) you are tied into Access becuase of the coding will be embedded into the DB file.

2) Also, you will require a copy of Access on each system that used the DB.
Running off a single Access copy will create problems for multiple users at the same time; Access used to create a lock file when running.

Multiple copies of Access (one on each user's system) can drive off a single DB with no problem.

 

[GasX]

I know this is not the elegant solution, but can I run two separate versions of the DB - one for the US and one for Europe and merge them when I need to generate reports from combined data?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
I know this is not the elegant solution, but can I run two separate versions of the DB - one for the US and one for Europe and merge them when I need to generate reports from combined data?

You'd just flag the records in the one DB as being either EU or US.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mwilding
I know this is not the elegant solution, but can I run two separate versions of the DB - one for the US and one for Europe and merge them when I need to generate reports from combined data?

You'd just flag the records in the one DB as being either EU or US.

That does nothing to solve the multiple user issue...

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
2) Also, you will require a copy of Access on each system that used the DB.
Running off a single Access copy will create problems for multiple users at the same time; Access used to create a lock file when running.

Office Developer would allow him to create license free MDE files he could distribute.

It really depends on his area and level of technical expertise. One option easier to learn would be Filemaker Pro.

 

[GasX]

Essentially, I manage all of the work done out of the US and my counterpart/underling manages work done out of the EU. The nature of our work is such that from a practical standpoint, we could operate off our own individual databases, which (assuming I can do this easily) would merge on a weekly/bi-weekly/monthly basis to generate corporate wide reports.

 

[sourceninja]

has anyone tried open office's new feature for databases? I belive it was called base. From what I understand it allows you to make access like interfaces to a database and build and manage the database. You can use their own database engine they supply or any database you want, mysql, ms sql, postgres, oracle, etc. So there would be the advantages of something like access for small projects with the ease of exapansion and no issues with multiple users.

I've never used it, but it looks as simple as access.

 

[GasX]

I want to stay away from "advanced" solutions. I have to sell this politically, and an access database is much more palatable than a more sophisticated system that will ultimately require internal IT resources to implement and manage.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
can access handle 2-3 simultaneous users?

I think Access can handle 40 simultaneous connections.

I would definitely use a shared Access database over a server-based solution in this situation.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mwilding
I know this is not the elegant solution, but can I run two separate versions of the DB - one for the US and one for Europe and merge them when I need to generate reports from combined data?

You'd just flag the records in the one DB as being either EU or US.

That does nothing to solve the multiple user issue...

There is no multi-user issue, so long as you're both licensed, you just open the same file at the same time.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
Essentially, I manage all of the work done out of the US and my counterpart/underling manages work done out of the EU. The nature of our work is such that from a practical standpoint, we could operate off our own individual databases, which (assuming I can do this easily) would merge on a weekly/bi-weekly/monthly basis to generate corporate wide reports.

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mwilding [/b]

I know this is not the elegant solution, but can I run two separate versions of the DB - one for the US and one for Europe and merge them when I need to generate reports from combined data?

You'd just flag the records in the one DB as being either EU or US.

If the database need to be seperate physically, then you will have to develop/use some query mechanism/tool to merge that data and/or create the reports.

If the same physical DB is used, then just flagging the records as stated in the quote will work fine.

 

[hooflung]

Open Office 2.0 has a nice built in database system similar to Access but is pure SQL and can take more multi user environments. Or you could go the more distiguished small office route and install the MSDE version of SQL Server 2005 and use Access as the front end.

Depending on what you need done this can be a very easy or very hard task. I would suggest going to www.sitepoint.com and maybe advertising in their help wanted threads to get a general idea of what you would need in a vendor.

Also, avoid using college help. Nothing worse than a kid that says they can do it for the cheap because they would like resume work. Its just not worth it.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
That does nothing to solve the multiple user issue...

mmm, what multiple user issue?

 

[L1FE]

If someone really knows what they're doing and the tables are as simple as you say, an experienced Access person can whip that out in a day or two. Give a day or two for system testing (it probably won't take that long if it's really simple) and then roll it out.

 

[mugs]

To answer your original question, I'd say it wouldn't take more than a week.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Mwilding
That does nothing to solve the multiple user issue...

mmm, what multiple user issue?

1. I thought that Access couldn't handle multiple simultaneous users - wrong
2. I was worried that internal issues would complicate international access (apparently not I have learned)

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Mwilding
That does nothing to solve the multiple user issue...

mmm, what multiple user issue?

1. I thought that Access couldn't handle multiple simultaneous users - wrong
2. I was worried that internal issues would complicate international access (apparently not I have learned)

Yeah it will do multiple users. There is a fundamental problem that you gotta be aware of though. Security for multiple users is handled by settings in the database itself. NTFS permissions for the DB must remain users:change. Presumably your users aren't retarded enough to delete the whole database but keep backups regular to be sure

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

I'm not kidding. Consider FM Pro if you want to DIY. Much more gradual learning curve than Access. We use it in specialized limited circumstances when our consultants and secretaries and other non-techies like to assume some control and add/modify layouts and fields. Maybe pick up an older version like 5 on Ebay for cheap and give it a whirl just to see. If you aren't going to use the advanced features of Access or integrate it with SQL Server or other office apps, then there' no particular reason to go with Access.