Access97 on WinXP: Slow, error-prone, and ???

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gary
  • Start date Start date
G

Gary

3 Main Issues:
* Adequacy of hardware configuration/OS combination to
handle Access 97
* The frequency of 'errors' on one machine vs another
* Reluctance to give up Access 97 in favor of Access XP,
presumably the latest

I enjoy a rather high comfort level in working in Access
97, having developed several small database applications
(on my Pentium II 'clone' with Windows 2K, 930 MHz, and
256 MB Ram) for various departments in a hospital where I
work.

In recent weeks, I've been developing yet another
database 'application' this time using a different machine-
-one that will be moved to the user area within the
hospital when the application is complete. So far, it's
been rather frustrating in terms of general machine
performance (speed), let alone working within Access.
Further, I've encountered numerous 'error conditions'
where a message would 'pop-up' informing me of such and
that Access would 'close', but giving me the opportunity
of sending the 'error report' to Microsoft!

New machine details:
* Dell Dimension 2350
* Pentium III Celeron, 2.2 GHz
* 128 MB RAM
* Windows XP Pro

Initially installed with Office XP set of applications, I
UNINSTALLED Office XP in favor of Office 97 Pro, with
which I was more familiar (and which I have on my Win 2000
Pro Clone). I also applied SERVICE PACK 2 to Office 97.

Over the weeks I've encounter numerous errors when using
Access on this Dell machine (that have not been
experienced when using my 'clone'!): representative
messages, according to the Windows Error Report Log
include:

* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, fault address
0x0014d13d.
%#x000a;
* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
vba332.dll, version 3.0.0.7019, fault address
0x0002536d.

* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
msjet35.dll, version 3.51.3328.0, fault address
0x0001f257.

* Application Error Fault bucket
01080406.

* Application Hang Fault bucket
02096553.

* Application Hang Hanging application
winword.exe, version 8.0.0.5622, hang module hungapp,
version 0.0.0.0, hang address 0x00000000.



Summary observations and concerns:

* The 'faster' Dell machine described above is SLOW
compared to my 'slower' clone (as described above), not
even taking Access into account! The Dell machine doesn't
seem adequate for the job!
* Any compatibility issues to be concerned about (giving
these errors on the XP machine)?
* With all that's 'out there' in terms of help and
documentation for Access 97, I am reluctant to shift over
to Access XP. (I never did install Office 2000--despite
our acquiring it--as I learned 'after the fact' that it
reportedly was NOT AS STABLE as Office 97!) Well, now--
what about Office XP (with Access XP)? Is THIS back on
track with Office 97 standards? What about the 'learning
curve' in Office XP (vs Office 97) in writing code 'behind
the forms', and the like? (DAO vs ????)

Ideas? Comments?

Any helpful ones would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Gary
 
Thanks, Ron, for the quick (and helpful!) reply. . . .

Are there any other 'takers' to my dilemma??? What about
the errors? Is Access XP better than Access 97?

Thanks again,
Gary


-----Original Message-----
First of all, Gary, your "faster" machine is slower overall for two reasons:
!.) The Celeron processor is a watered down Pentium, therefore slower; 2.)
128 MB RAM is barely enough for XP itself.

I have also noticed speed issues with A97 on XP - so far, in spite of the
fact that I have asked the question numerous times in these NG's, no one has
been able to give me a reason why this is so. The only response I have
received is advice that I upgrade to Access XP (or 2002, whatever). I just
acquired AXP, converted my App, both front-end and back end. Same symptom -
it's fine when there is only one user but as soon as another user opens the
app, User 1 still performs adequately, but subsequent users are sooo slow as
to make the app totally unusable.

As for differences - the main difference seems to be that AXP uses ADO as
the DB middleware rather than DAO. But DAO is still available. So the
learning curve need not be too steep - you can gradually learn/implement the
new features, while still able to work using what you already know.
Click to expand...
*** BULK OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE CLIPPED ***
 
Ron Hinds said:
I have also noticed speed issues with A97 on XP -
Click to expand...

FWIW I've been using A97 on Win XP for a number of months without any
performance issues. Mind you I have 768 Mb of RAM in one system and
512MB/1GB RAM in the other.
so far, in spite of the
fact that I have asked the question numerous times in these NG's, no one has
been able to give me a reason why this is so. The only response I have
received is advice that I upgrade to Access XP (or 2002, whatever).
Click to expand...

Not from me. said:
I just
acquired AXP, converted my App, both front-end and back end. Same symptom -
it's fine when there is only one user but as soon as another user opens the
app, User 1 still performs adequately, but subsequent users are sooo slow as
to make the app totally unusable.
Click to expand...

Ah, this is different. Standard blurb follows which I'm sure you've
read.

The three most common performance problems in Access 2000 are:
- LDB locking which a persistent recordset connection or an always
open bound form corrects (multiple users)
- sub datasheet Name property set to [Auto] should be [None]
- Track name AutoCorrect should be off

For more information on these, less likely causes, other tips and
links to MS KB articles visit my Access Performance FAQ page at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/performancefaq.htm
As for differences - the main difference seems to be that AXP uses ADO as
the DB middleware rather than DAO. But DAO is still available. So the
learning curve need not be too steep - you can gradually learn/implement the
new features, while still able to work using what you already know.
Click to expand...

If you have no intentions of upsizing your app to SQL Server then I'd
be tempted to stay with ADO.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
 
Gary said:
I enjoy a rather high comfort level in working in Access
97, having developed several small database applications
(on my Pentium II 'clone' with Windows 2K, 930 MHz, and
256 MB Ram) for various departments in a hospital where I
work.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I quite like A97 myself.
New machine details:
* Dell Dimension 2350
* Pentium III Celeron, 2.2 GHz
* 128 MB RAM
* Windows XP Pro
Click to expand...

Not enough RAM. Now granted I have a lot of software which starts up
such as Antivirus, pop up blocker, etc, but I find that 200 Mb
consumed is what Task Mgr shows once it's finished booting and I've
logged in.
Initially installed with Office XP set of applications, I
UNINSTALLED Office XP in favor of Office 97 Pro, with
which I was more familiar (and which I have on my Win 2000
Pro Clone). I also applied SERVICE PACK 2 to Office 97.
Click to expand...

And hopefully Jet 3.5 SP3?
* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, fault address
0x0014d13d.
%#x000a;
* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
vba332.dll, version 3.0.0.7019, fault address
0x0002536d.

* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
msjet35.dll, version 3.51.3328.0, fault address
0x0001f257.

* Application Error Fault bucket
01080406.

* Application Hang Fault bucket
02096553.

* Application Hang Hanging application
winword.exe, version 8.0.0.5622, hang module hungapp,
version 0.0.0.0, hang address 0x00000000.
Click to expand...

I'd suspect this is a hardware problem of some sort. What I don't
know though.

I've personally seen msaccess.exe - Application Error "The instruction
at "0x12345678" referenced memory at "0x90abcdef". The memory could
not be "written" which decompile fixed. Where the eight digit
numbers were different each time I started up the MDB or at random
times when working with the MDB.

However these messages were in Win2000. These messages might be
different in Win XP.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
 
Tony Toews said:
If you have no intentions of upsizing your app to SQL Server then I'd
be tempted to stay with ADO.
Click to expand...

DAO not ADO.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
 
Gary said:
3 Main Issues:
* Adequacy of hardware configuration/OS combination to
handle Access 97
* The frequency of 'errors' on one machine vs another
* Reluctance to give up Access 97 in favor of Access XP,
presumably the latest

I enjoy a rather high comfort level in working in Access
97, having developed several small database applications
(on my Pentium II 'clone' with Windows 2K, 930 MHz, and
256 MB Ram) for various departments in a hospital where I
work.

In recent weeks, I've been developing yet another
database 'application' this time using a different machine-
-one that will be moved to the user area within the
hospital when the application is complete. So far, it's
been rather frustrating in terms of general machine
performance (speed), let alone working within Access.
Further, I've encountered numerous 'error conditions'
where a message would 'pop-up' informing me of such and
that Access would 'close', but giving me the opportunity
of sending the 'error report' to Microsoft!

New machine details:
* Dell Dimension 2350
* Pentium III Celeron, 2.2 GHz
* 128 MB RAM
* Windows XP Pro

Initially installed with Office XP set of applications, I
UNINSTALLED Office XP in favor of Office 97 Pro, with
which I was more familiar (and which I have on my Win 2000
Pro Clone). I also applied SERVICE PACK 2 to Office 97.

Over the weeks I've encounter numerous errors when using
Access on this Dell machine (that have not been
experienced when using my 'clone'!): representative
messages, according to the Windows Error Report Log
include:

* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, fault address
0x0014d13d.
%#x000a;
* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
vba332.dll, version 3.0.0.7019, fault address
0x0002536d.

* Application Error Faulting application
msaccess.exe, version 8.0.0.5903, faulting module
msjet35.dll, version 3.51.3328.0, fault address
0x0001f257.

* Application Error Fault bucket
01080406.

* Application Hang Fault bucket
02096553.

* Application Hang Hanging application
winword.exe, version 8.0.0.5622, hang module hungapp,
version 0.0.0.0, hang address 0x00000000.



Summary observations and concerns:

* The 'faster' Dell machine described above is SLOW
compared to my 'slower' clone (as described above), not
even taking Access into account! The Dell machine doesn't
seem adequate for the job!
* Any compatibility issues to be concerned about (giving
these errors on the XP machine)?
* With all that's 'out there' in terms of help and
documentation for Access 97, I am reluctant to shift over
to Access XP. (I never did install Office 2000--despite
our acquiring it--as I learned 'after the fact' that it
reportedly was NOT AS STABLE as Office 97!) Well, now--
what about Office XP (with Access XP)? Is THIS back on
track with Office 97 standards? What about the 'learning
curve' in Office XP (vs Office 97) in writing code 'behind
the forms', and the like? (DAO vs ????)

Ideas? Comments?

Any helpful ones would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Gary
Click to expand...
 
Gary said:
Thanks, Ron, for the quick (and helpful!) reply. . . .

Are there any other 'takers' to my dilemma??? What about
the errors? Is Access XP better than Access 97?

Thanks again,
Gary
Click to expand...

I am, and have run my a97 applications on a GOOD MANY windows xp machines.

My conclusions?

a97 on winXP is absolutely stellar. From a reliability point of view, it is
has been un-precedented.

I find that running my application split on the windows XP network ACTUALLY
RUNS FASTER then when run on a win98 box with no network!. Without question,
the network setup for windows XP is far far far superior to that of win98.

In fact, the setup has been so good, I am actually SCARED to upgrade this
client to ms-access XP. The machines absolute scream. Some of the pc's in
office are running windows XP on 750MHZ Pentiums III. That is certainly much
less juice then the P4 at 2.2. (regardless of the Clerairon issue).

I would say that 128 megs is ram is on the light side..and should be a min
256.

Now, of course, any developer who works with ms-access will ensure that
ms-access is installed correctly.

A good ms-access 97 install needs:

sr1 (if really old version)
sr2b
jet35sp3.exe


Installing the above 3 services packs should result in a BULLET proof
install.

There is for sure the issue of keeping the back end connection open to the
front end. This issue does NOT seem to occur with win98. With win2000 and
winXP, you need to keep the backend opened. You are running split mdb
...right?. I mean, there is a post virtually every day about performance
being restored on a win2000/xp network by keeping the back end opened. The
same goes for splitting your database for reliability. Just how much beating
over the head do people need?

I can't really think of a better situation from both a performance and
reliability point view then running a97 and winXP. Basiclty, a97 and windows
XP is a real winning combo.

I am going to upgrade some of these folks to a2002 soon...but the experience
with a97 on XP has been so good as to be beyond belief. I would actually use
the term rock solid...
 
You are one of *many* people with this same problem. Microsoft is
unfortunately ignoring this problem. But, after months of questioning,
searching, etc. I found someone who quite by accident discovered that the
Office Startup Assistant, which supposedly speeds up opening Office apps,
may be the problem. Search for instances of the shortcut to it in your
Startup folders by entering "Office Startup*" WITH the quotes in the Search
for Files or Folders box and DELETE them, then restart your machine. After
hearing about this I had a customer who has been reporting this slowness
issue to me try it and so far he has not compalined about slowness since!
 
Back
Top