After my experiment with MSAccess vs MySQL which shows MS Access hugely overperforming Mysql odbc insert by a factor 1000% before I would do the same experiment with SQL Server I searched for some other’s people and found this one:
http://blog.nkadesign.com/2009/access-vs-sql-server-some-stats-part-1/
which says
“As a side note, in this particular test, Access offers much better raw performance than SQL Server. In more complex scenarios it’s very likely that Access’ performance would degrade more than SQL Server, but it’s nice to see that Access isn’t a sloth.”
So is worth bother with some db server when data is less than 2 Gb and users are about 20 (knowing that MS Access theorically supports up to 255 concurrent users though practically it’s around a dozen concurrent users only).
Are there any real world studies that really compare MS Access with other db in these specific use case ? Because professionaly speaking I keep hearing people systematically recommend DB server from people who have never used Access just because they think DB Server can only perform better in every case which I used to think myself I confess.
For 20 users and amounts of data that are well below Jet/ACE’s limitations (I would start planning to upsize if a Jet/ACE data file approached 1GB), there is not necessarily a performance benefit to upsizing.
However, if you want the freedom to just throw 20 more users at your app, you’d have to have written it very carefully for that not to cause problems with a Jet/ACE data store. It can be done, but it requires more care in application design. Of course, if those 20 more users are almost all read-only, that increases your headroom, but they generally are not.
The other thing to consider is security and reliability. With a server back end you get a higher level of both. That doesn’t mean the upsizing is necessarily justified (upsizing comes with costs that many fail to recognize, e.g., administrative, redesign of the app, and different user/security management tools) — you have to balance the entire range of costs and benefits.
Conversely, a server back end is often fully justified with much smaller user populations and smaller amounts of data precisely because of the security and reliability requirements of those particular applications.
At 20 users, I’d say that if you’re contemplating new development rather than upsizing an existing app, it would make more sense to use a server back end from the get-go in order to avail yourself of the breathing room it gives you for expansion. It means you don’t have to be as careful in terms of implementation (unless you want to run it across a WAN, in which case you wouldn’t be able to use a Jet/ACE back end, anyway).
But if you’re just asking whether or not an existing app should be upsized just because it’s reached 20 users, then the answer is, no, unless there are already performance issues with the Jet/ACE back end.