[WEB4LIB] Access2002 vs. SQL .. which way do we go?

[Jodi Thomson]

Our Library uses a method by which a report is run on our catalogue
(we're currently using DRA classic) extracting the journal holdings into
plain text delimited format. The output of this report is then run
through a perl script which converts it to HTML. We also have lists
created of CD holdings, video holdings, serials holdings, etc. These run
on a reqular basis by batch job.

Currently I am in the process of rescripting so that the plain text is
read by a php script thus dynamically producing the webpages on the fly
allowing the ability to sort alphabetically or otherwise.

Dependant upon how large your journal collection is is how you'll want
to store them. If Access is currently housing the collection adequetely
then leave it status quo. Then automate the production of the weblists
by extracting a delimited report containing the fields you wish to
display, then parse it through a perl or php script.
Moving to an SQL server would have its advantages in a larger
collection. But the old adage holds. If it aint broke don't mess with
it. Do you really wish to migrate the data?

Regards
Jodi

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
Jodi W. Anderson, Mr (A+, MCP) - Computer Systems Consultant
Waikato University Library - Computing Operations Group
Ph: +64 7 838 4323
email: jodi at waikato.ac.nz

"Right now I'm having amnesia and deja vu at the same time. I think I've
forgotten this before."


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vicki Falkland [mailto:rch.library at wch.org.au] 
> Sent: Thursday, 5 December 2002 2:51 p.m.
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [WEB4LIB] Access2002 vs. SQL .. which way do we go?
> 
> 
> dear all,
> 
> our library is planning to convert our static HTML journals 
> list into a
> dynamic list. i am a total newbie when it comes to dynamic 
> websites and
> databases. i do follow threads posted here on this topic, and 
> have searched
> the Archives, but i need to ask something about different 
> methods please ...
> 
> CURRENTLY: our journal titles are all contained in an 
> Access(2000) database
> (by a colleague), which we use to print hard copy lists and 
> reports, but
> the web version is hand-coded (by me). therefore, we are 
> maintaining two
> lists. 
> 
> THE ORIGINAL PLAN: with help from our organisation's 
> webmaster (for a fee;
> our webmaster charges for his time and expertise), we would 
> move the info
> from the Access database into SQL, which i presume would mean 
> we'd have to
> learn SQL to maintain it. we would also have a web-based 
> admin page set up
> so that either of us could edit the (single) list as necessary.
> 
> THE PROPOSED NEW PLAN: my colleague has now suggested that 
> Access2002 is
> miraculous and will do everything we want without having to 
> bother with
> SQL, or the webmaster, or the webmaster's fee (although of 
> course there
> would be the cost of upgrading Access). the claim is that 
> Access2002 is
> more "flexible" than SQL, and that it will be easier for us 
> to maintain.
> 
> i'm nervous .... and not convinced that Access2002 is the answer.
> can anyone give me reasons (in simple terms please!) why i'm 
> wrong to think
> this proposed new plan is a Bad Idea ? 
> 
> i'm willing to BE convinced, but i need to hear it from 
> someone far more
> experienced and knowledgable on this topic than myself OR my esteemed
> colleague :)
> 
> thanks,
> vicki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Library Information Technology Support Officer
> 
> ===============================================
> Women's and Children's Health
> J.W. Grieve Library
> Royal Children's Hospital
> Flemington Rd, Parkville, Vic, 3052
> Ph: (03) 9345 7010
> Fax: (03) 9347 8421
> Email: rch.library at wch.org.au
> Internet: www.wch.org.au/library
> ================================================
> 
>