Any consensus on stability/readiness of Access 2007 runtime?

[David W. Fenton]

Regardless of any response you get, I will continue to use
decompile as an essential tool for solving a particular kind of
problem when developing in Access.

I use it for *preventing* particular kinds of problems. In my
opinion, waiting until you have strange problems and then
decompiling to resolve them is way too late -- you've likely already
corrupted your code at that point, whereas keeping the compiled code
clean with regular decompiles mostly prevents corruption from ever
happening in the first place.

 

[David W. Fenton]

Closing and re-opening would actually be the ideal approach, and I
should probably promote that. In practice, compacting a 2nd time
actually achieves the same outcome in a slightly faster way (i.e.
Access closes it and reopens it.)

It's not the MDB's code state that I'm worried, but Access's. And
that was what I understood MichKa to be using as the basis for his
recommendation to always close the decompile instance before doing
anything else -- Access itself might be in a suspect state after the
decompile.

 

[david]

They are right: All Caps really is harder to read :~)

Off topic to the main discussion, but since I'm here: There
were two problems with Conditional Compilation.

1) Conditional Compilation constants defined in the IDE
as "Conditional Compilation Arguments", are not visible
when you make an MDE.

2) Access 2000 (and I assume +) actually attempt to compile
all of your code anyway, before ignoring the conditional code.
So you can't actually use it to comment out large blocks of
code or code specific to A97: compilation fails on any invalid
code regardless of "conditional compilation".

(david)

 

[charleswehner]

dbguy_atlanta said that crashes on Vista are to be expected. That is
exactly my experience.

The Global Error Handler is buggy. It announces errors that do not
exist. It seeks to correct errors that do not exist. That way, it
CREATES errors, and often crashes.

Here we see Microsoft trying to shift the blame:


http://www.downloadsquad.com/2008/03/28/29-of-windows-vista-crashes-caused-by-nvidia-drivers/

These are however, MICROSOFT statistics. Also NVidea were writing
their DLLs to run UNDER Microsoft bugs.

Nothing works on Vista. Get a stable operating system. If it must be
Microsoft, use Windows 98. Things went downhill after that. So, rule
out the Microsoft bugs before you accuse other software.

Access 2007 is unlikely to be unstable.

Charles Douglas Wehner

 

[Larry Linson]

I'm a certified DBA, SQL 2005.

That is certainly possible, Mr. Kempf, but I just cannot remember when you
ever provided a link to any Microsoft information to support that claim. I,
for one, would be very happy to see proof that you are, indeed, certified by
Microsoft.

On the other hand, you ask him/her, but I haven't seen a claim by "Genl
Access" to be an SQL DBA. That certification does not, by the way, indicate
any particular understanding or expertise in Access, which is the subject of
this newsgroup.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Office Access MVP

 

[David W. Fenton]

1) Conditional Compilation constants defined in the IDE
as "Conditional Compilation Arguments", are not visible
when you make an MDE.

I do not understand this comment. By definition, the process of
creating an MDE will strip out the conditional code, since all
canonical code is stripped out, and only the compiled code remains.
Thus, you wouldn't want to create an MDE from a codebase with
conditional compilation that applies to compatible versions of
Access. In other words, if you have A2K-specific code and
A2K2/K3-specific code, you can't creat a single MDB to run on A2K,
A2K2 and A2K3. You'd need an A2K MDE and an A2K2/K3 MDE, since only
then would you get the compilation that was appropriate to the
target Access version.

2) Access 2000 (and I assume +) actually attempt to compile
all of your code anyway, before ignoring the conditional code.
So you can't actually use it to comment out large blocks of
code or code specific to A97: compilation fails on any invalid
code regardless of "conditional compilation".

Really? I can't find it right off the bat, but I'm pretty sure I had
some conditional compilation in some code that is running in both
A2K and A97. But wait -- isn't conditional compilation a feature
introduced *after* A97?

I think I should stop asking questions about something I don't use
and have no intention of using!

 

[David W. Fenton]

m:

Global Error Handler

What, exactly, are you referring to with that phrase?

 

[David W. Fenton]

On the other hand, you ask him/her, but I haven't seen a claim by
"Genl Access" to be an SQL DBA. That certification does not, by
the way, indicate any particular understanding or expertise in
Access, which is the subject of this newsgroup.

It generally doesn't indicate any actual understanding of SQL
Server, either -- all it indicates is that you passed the relevant
certification exam. You can do that without having a frigging clue
about actual using the product being certified.

 

[david]

You can define conditional compilation arguments in code,
or as a database property in the IDE.

I used conditional compilation in A97 to block out the A2000
code. In A2000 the conditional compilation allowed the A2000
code. So it was half a solution. What it didn't do was correctly
block out the A97 code when running in A2000, so you could
use A2000 specific code but not really use A97 specific code.

(david)

 

[a a r o n _ k e m p f]

I don't need to prove anything; I have my certification registered as
a part of a 'microsoft certified gold partner' and because there are
MVPs around here that stalk me-- I chose to not reveal this
information.

I don't need to prove anything to you, you're just a Jet crybaby.

And for the record, certification in SQL Server makes me a great
resource for MS Access.
MS Access works best when you use Access Data Projects and ADP live in
SQL Server.

I've been using Access / SQL / ADP almost every day for a decade--
because I got sick and tired of Jet crashing.
So yes- I am a very credible resource.

I just choose not to invest in depecrated features like 'SECURITY' and
'REPLICATION' because it is best to do these things in SQL Server.

If Jet was faster than SQL, and it was more reliable-- it might be
worth another shot.
But it's not-- Jet crashes, it hangs, and it leads to locking
problems.

So I'll stick with ADP / ASP / SQL Server thanks.

-Aaron

 

[a a r o n _ k e m p f]

Whatever David.

You have no clue, no credibility-- you claim that access 2007 supports
replication and ULS, and I just don't see it anywhere in Access 2007
(format).

SQL Server certification was a very positive thing that I've done with
my life.

And yes-- I am a better resource-- because I choose reliable database
engines-- than nearly anyone else in this newsgroup.

Sorry that your'e stuck on an obsolete database.
That doesn't make me any less of an expert.

-Aaron