T
Tim Tafflinger
I am using a pass through query to copy data between a table located in a SQL
Server box local to the desktop running the Access application, and a remote
SQL Server box. The copy goes both ways, first local to remote then remote
to local. The local to remote only takes a couple minutes but remote to
local takes about 10 minutes. FYI - In both cases the query connection
string is to the remote box because the local box can't see the remote but
the remote can see the local. That's another problem for another post.
The only theory I can come up with as to why the difference is that even
though Access doesn't interpret the query, it is still involved in the data
transfer. So when doing local to remote the data transfer is: local sql
server > desktop > remote sql server. When doing remote to local the data
transfer is: remote sql server > desktop > remote sql server > local sql
server.
Does that make any sense? If so, would a stored procedure running on the
remote box that is executed from a pass through still do the same thing or
would it just be sql server to sql server then?
Server box local to the desktop running the Access application, and a remote
SQL Server box. The copy goes both ways, first local to remote then remote
to local. The local to remote only takes a couple minutes but remote to
local takes about 10 minutes. FYI - In both cases the query connection
string is to the remote box because the local box can't see the remote but
the remote can see the local. That's another problem for another post.
The only theory I can come up with as to why the difference is that even
though Access doesn't interpret the query, it is still involved in the data
transfer. So when doing local to remote the data transfer is: local sql
server > desktop > remote sql server. When doing remote to local the data
transfer is: remote sql server > desktop > remote sql server > local sql
server.
Does that make any sense? If so, would a stored procedure running on the
remote box that is executed from a pass through still do the same thing or
would it just be sql server to sql server then?