Access vs. Excel

Reply #8

time*treat — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 06:23:43 GMT

Well, it looks like I'm on the right track then. I should have stated it as I wrote code that created the data table. I open the 1 file (which contains all the combos), not create the table, each run. If the system pans out, then I'll get a faster PC, before learning a new app. One thing about a slow machine is you learn to write really efficient code.

Reply #7

Todd — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:58:44 GMT

By the way, I don't want to leave the impression that one way is right and the other is wrong . In program code, there is no perfect -- or correct -- way of doing things. It's kind of like lottery systems: nobody has the one correct solution . Everyone's ideas have merit.

Reply #6

Todd — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:57:10 GMT

That's one of those things where we may differ on how we approach the problem.

For something like your example of a data set (table) with every possible combination, I would almost never build a table. Since the data is highly predictable, and is a function of mathematics, I would just calculate whatever values I needed using small, reusable user defined functions, rather than the brute force approach of creating a table.

By doing so, it actually becomes much more fexible (it is easy to... [ More ]

Reply #5

time*treat — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:20:15 GMT

Right now, I'm kicking around a 5/36 numberset. Basically, I am trying to find out if Access will handle the data better, i.e. let me see all records (of really big data sets).

I have, though VBA in Excel, written a bit of code that creates a file with each combination as a record. I retrieve a record with a GET. Record 1 = 1,2,3,4,5 ... record 376,992 = 32,33,34,35,36. The 65536x255 limitation has been worked around as far as working w/ the data. I am able to create static libraries in... [ More ]

Reply #4

sysp34 — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:56:59 GMT

The IT competent had spoken

excel had limitation only 65536 rows and 255 column per worksheet

sysp34

Reply #3

lottaloot — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:53:22 GMT

Thanks for the info Todd.

Reply #2

Todd — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:22:45 GMT

Here's the deal: it depends on how you're going to USE the data:

If it will be you manipulating the data yourself, and you're going to do lots of different things with the data (you need flexibility), then stick with Excel.If you're only going to have a PROGRAM use the data -- like a Visual Basic program -- then use Access, because it's much harder to get a program to read data from Excel.

For most people, you should stick with Excel. Sometimes it may be impressive to hear someone say the... [ More ]

Reply #1

lottaloot — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:05:43 GMT

I would like to know the answer to that as well.

I have access, but haven't a clue as to how to use it.

Access vs. Excel

time*treat — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 14:14:21 GMT

I know some have used Access to manage their data. I'd like to know from those that have used Excel too, if Access is worth the slowdown period to learn it. I've got a book or two on it, but so far, everything I have needed to do, I have found a way to handle in the spreadsheet program.