ODBC vs. Sharepoint - which is faster? (1 Viewer)

perlfan

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 12:25
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
192
Hi,

currently I access my backend / data, that is stored in an online database, via ODBC. Some users of my app are complaining about the connection speed. Now I would to explore the option of storing the database in SharePoint. Do you guys have experiences with the speed of both methods? Is accessing and processing of data stored in SharePoint tables really faster? Or is there no difference?

Looking forward to your input! Frank
 

NauticalGent

Ignore List Poster Boy
Local time
Today, 15:25
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
6,286
Greetings Frank,I have some experience with this very issue.

I was using SP until my company (activity if you know what I mean and given your location, I suspect you do), until we "upgraded" to 2013 and then Access would "forget" the linked tables. Long story and I think I mentioned that in this forum at one time.

We now use SQL Server (ODBC) for a BE and I would have to admit that it IS a hair slower but I believe that is ONLY because of the cache feature that Access and SharePoint provides...an illusion of speed if you will.

But even with that slight performance hit, I am still happier with SQL Server. Write conflicts are handled better, no problems with off-line updates and orphaned records, the robust Maintenance Plans SQL Server offers... I could go on but trust me when I say, the move to SQL server was a God send that I didn't appreciate at first.Hope this helps.

John
 
Last edited:

perlfan

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 12:25
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
192
Ok, I understand that SP is not offering a much higher performance. Yes, using MySQL as the BE is quite convenient, but I want to increase speed somehow. Has someone ever compared MySQL and SQL Server in terms of speed when used as backend for an Ms Access app? I always used MySQL because it's free, but if there is a substantial difference in performance I'd switch... someone??
 

Minty

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 19:25
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
10,355
You can try for yourself using SQL server express, which is also free.
I'd be surprised if there was any noticeable performance difference.
 

CJ_London

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 19:25
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
16,553
You say your be is online what rdbms is it?
 

NauticalGent

Ignore List Poster Boy
Local time
Today, 15:25
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
6,286
This would be one for someone with hardware experience I would suspect. If I understand it correctly MySQL is usually PC based and you are limited to the performance of that PC.

In my case, our SQL Server is on a RAID array with in-Godly horse power, storage and other capabilities that can only be discussed during daylight hours...
 

Minty

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 19:25
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
10,355
Pass the ladder down please....
 

CJ_London

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 19:25
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
16,553
I protest - where does the OP say which rdbms he is using?
 

theseus

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 15:25
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
32
Just as a point of record, Microsoft says that Office 365 doesn't support publishing a database to Sharepoint. My manager had me look into this for a database we developed but because of the combination of software (Office365/2016/2010) in our organization and other reasons (security being one of them), we couldn't do it.



Here is a link to Microsoft's how to build and publish to sharepoint.
https://support.office.com/en-us/ar...arepoint-e68bf007-410c-43b2-bf21-322ddbcf5411
 

theDBguy

I’m here to help
Staff member
Local time
Today, 12:25
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
21,358
I protest - where does the OP say which rdbms he is using?
If I would dare to make a guess, based on post #3, I'd say the OP is using MySQL and would like to know if switching it to SQL Server would be beneficial.
 

CJ_London

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 19:25
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
16,553
Can an RDBMS other than Access use Sharepoint?
no idea - sql server might be able to reference it - but in this context, isn't sharepoint a rdbms?

OP says an 'online BE'. Could be oracle, mySQL, sql server, sql Azure, could even be access if there is a suitable host out there. However I take the point about post #3, implies mySQL

Then there is the online host? MS for azure, many others, including google, for the other rdbms's. Performance may have nothing to do with the rdbms, it could be to do with the level of service the OP has bought into. Or the server is located far away (from the UK, accessing a server in Europe is significantly quicker than accessing one in the US). Too many simultaneous users will create a bottleneck at the entry point.

It might be to do with front ends not designed to work with the significantly slower WAN network.

I've used both sql server and MySQL for different applications so cannot make a true comparison, but my impression is they are about the same. I certainly didn't think one was any faster or slower than the other.
 

sonic8

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 20:25
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
998
If I understand it correctly MySQL is usually PC based and you are limited to the performance of that PC.
MySQL runs on a wide variety of operating systems and hardware and can even be distributed across multiple computers in a MySQL cluster.


I regards to performance, I don't think there is fundamental difference between MySQL and Microsoft-SQL-Server.
 

sonic8

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 20:25
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
998
Is accessing and processing of data stored in SharePoint tables really faster? Or is there no difference?
Technically accessing data in SharePoint will be a lot slower than doing the same in SQL-Server.

However, when using linked SharePoint tables in Access, the data will be cached locally. This creates the impression of everything being much faster, because the user will mostly observe the speed of the local operation on the cached data only.


SharePoint has lots of limitations in addittion to slower performance (e.g. limit to 10k rows per table/list) when used as a backend database. So I would only recommend it if you actually need the caching mechanism to provide offline capabilities.
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 12:25
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,825
Older infrastructure could play a part in transfer rates. Older CAT cable, switches and servers running older versions of SQL / MySQL. Not to mention older individual workstations putting unnecessary traffic or load on the network do to poorly designed queries.
 

perlfan

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 12:25
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
192
Thanks for the input. We'll use our frontend with MS SQL Server - as soon as I can compare the performance with MySQL, I'll share this here. Frank
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom