When I go to create an RDS database, the db.t2.micro database is not showing up for PostgreSQL.
I have the "Include previous generation classes" box checked. The instance type is showing for MySQL but not PostgreSQL.
Postgres 12 and lower can run Free Tier, anything above 12 cannot
I think when aws adds a new version of database, it offers only the old version as a free tier. Currently postgres 13 is available but only lower than 13 has free tier
PostgreSQL 13 is not supported on T2 generation machines. Use a lower version of PostgreSQL to used
Related
Our team has been using Microsoft Access 2010 as a frontend for an SQL Server 2014, and are dependent on the Upsizing Wizard in Access to migrate tables from Access to SQL.
For example, if there is an SQL database named papers, our team has an Access file named papers_temp.accdb. When we want to make changes to a given table (or create a new table) in the papers database, we do this locally in papers_temp.accdb before using the upsizing wizard to migrate the given table from Access to the SQL database, overwriting the table in SQL if it already exists.
From Office 2013 and Access 2013, the Upsizing Wizard is gone, and we are in need of an alternative. Is there a similar tool available for Access 2016, or do we have to adapt to something else entirely? So far open to suggestions.
SQL Server Migration Assistant for Access
I've been exploring this program for the last couple of days, after finding many recommendations for it on the web. It appears to be able to do the upsizing and migration that we need.
However, more often that not, when attempting to select (and load) a table, the program is stuck in a loading process that never seems to end (tried waiting for one hour), meaning I'm forced to close SSMA without saving my project. In general, the program does not seem very stable, and we'd prefer to find a solution that was more familiar to work with.
Perhaps I'm missing something?
Correct, the upsizing wizard has been deprecated and the replacement is (SSMA).
The latest version as of today is:
Microsoft SQL Server Migration Assistant 8.5 for Access
https://aka.ms/ssmaforaccess
In my testing I have learned that it is not compatible with the 2019 O365 version of DAO and you cannot install the correct version of DAO along side O365. This means that this solution is dead in the water. Microsoft has updated us in to a corner where we can't use any of their previous solutions on the latest version of Access. At this point I think we are waiting for MS to update the tools to support the latest version of O365 Access.
If you are stuck in this boat with us the only other option is 3rd party software.
We are attempting to convert our Oracle database to PostgreSQL (due to Oracle's ludicrous pricing model). The system is not in production yet but will soon so this needs to be done ASAP. Thank goodness we don't use that many Oracle database specific features and treat it mostly as a data store from out .NET applications in C#. As a replacement for OPD.Net we are looking at using the Data Provider for PostgreSQL, Npgsql.NET.
Now I have installed PostgreSQL 9.5 on my Windows 2012 R2 server and want to create my first set of tables. I run PgAdmin III and login and am presented with a postgres 'default administrative connection database', now what?
I have read Database Schema Recommendations for an Application but that page was last modified over 3 years ago and starts at the wrong point - for instance, do I use the postgres 'default administrative connection database' to house my schema? Or do I create another database? Is there a naming convention? I will probably use multiple schema's housed in one database but would appreciate any recommendations or best practices for creating PostgreSQL databases and schemas.
Lastly, any pointers for converting from Oracle? I have read Oracle to PostgreSQL Conversion but again, out of date - only considers Oracle 8. Anything that considers Oracle 12c? Anything that explains PostgreSQL in Oracle developer and DBA terms?
Currently I am using free 20 MB Azure SQL database web edition. Microsoft is going to retire the Azure Web and Business edition after 12 September 2015. Microsoft had announced new service tiers.
If I do not upgrade it to new service tiers, will it upgrade automatically? Which service tiers will it get upgraded to?
If it will not upgrade automatically, will my database get deleted or remains as usual?
Yes if you don't upgrade, you will be automatically upgraded post Web and Business retirement. The destination service tier will be defined based on the billable size of the DBs. You can get details of the pricing tier here: http://azure.microsoft.com/blog/2014/04/24/azure-sql-database-introduces-new-service-tiers/
For free DBs specifically, we are working on a replacement for this SKU which will be available for the retirement date. Free DB will be mapped in the new Free DB SKU.
Thanks
Silvia
I called Azure Sales number and the sales person told me that the free 20MB database will remain free of charge after the retirement of Web and Business pricing tier.
Besides that, I also create support ticket regarding this matter. The support engineer told me that the free 20 MB database will be automatically upgraded to a new free 20 MB database with Basic tier that carries characteristics of Basic except the database size. Attached is the picture of email sent by Azure Support Engineer:
Currently, I'm developing a C#-based program for a small rental company (3 locations). Right now, they use MS Access 97 (Jet SQL based) as database and I wish to upgrade this. However, I do want to keep Access as Front-end, since I will be gone after the development, and the local personnel knows how to use Access (some changes require direct editing in the database).
I am doubting between two options:
Upgrade to Access 2013, therefore using MS ACE as DB engine
Use SQL Server Express with Access as front-end, therefore using MS SQL Server as DB engine
The system will have one shared database and one for each location. They are using a shared drive for this (they work on MS Server 2008). Their databases are pretty small (< 1 GB combined), so I won't need the extra performance e.g. MySQL provides. I know the difference between ACE and SQL Server in terms of design (File-sharing vs client/server), but I still don't know what would be better suitable for this situation.
What is the better option here when looking at performance, reliability, security and connection to the application?
Thanks in advance.
As #granadaCoder points out, the security, performance, reliability of using SQLExpress is far better than Jet and ACE and is just as easy to connect/link to your Access 97 front-end. Microsoft provides a free migration tool that is very powerful and easy to use.
Converting an MS-Access 97 application to 2013 may present some real challenges as Cwell. onverting from Access 97 to 2013 is a two step process. You must first convert it to 2002-2003 and then to 2007/2013. You will also need to purchase licenses for all users and the back-end database.
In addition, if your 97 application references external objects, they may not work with later versions of Access.
As #granadaCoder also suggests, a good medium to long term plan would be to convert the front-end to .NET.
Microsoft Jet is just a file sitting on a network drive.
So when you do queries......the Jet-Runtime (on the local PC) has to bring large chunks of data (entire tables) across the network.
Thus it is brutal.
Sql Server (Express or Other)....runs as a service on a host computer. And when a query is executed, it does processing on the Server and returns "smaller buckets of information".
(Which you mention knowing the difference between file-sharing vs client-server).
If you cannot give up your Access(the program) front end...then doing link-tables to Sql-Server would be you best bet, IMHO.
Well, I'm talking from performance.
Security, you have more options for different users and passwords. And you can slice up which logins/db-users are allowed to do what.
IIRC, a Jet database allows one password. Aka, all or nothing.
https://www.connectionstrings.com/ace-oledb-12-0/with-database-password/
That alone would make me go with SqlExpress.
..
The big early design decision was to use Microsoft-Access-Forms. You're paying the price for that early decision.
Even when people use a Jet-Database, I would only use it for basic data storage. And put a Layer .Net application on top of it. Then a swap out to a different data-store isn't as drastic.
Good luck dude.
I've decided to develop VB.net Application With SQL server Express 2008, but Microsoft says:
They limit 4 GB Size per DB!
So I'm developing my app for Single user Desktop pc, so what should I do when the DB reached the Maximum size?
When the DB size reached to maximum size, is it a good thing to create a new DB and allow my vb.net application to work with both DBs?
in regards to the 4GB limit of your free version of SQL Server, your options as I see them:
1) purge old data as it becomes unnecessary
2) hack application to use multiple databases (would this even work on a single pc?)
3) hack your application to move items to data files as necessary and out of the DB
4) pay for the proper version of SQL Server
5) go to MySql or something similar
SQL Server 2008 R2 Express size limit was increased to 10 GB, so if your just starting a new project you should use 2008 R2.
Nothing wrong to attempt for free tools. I suggest that you redesign your application to use multiple databases.
1) Create a new table for storing multiple databases setting data
2) Things to store in that table include: total databases, connection string for each database, and so on.
Consider storing each table in a separate database (where appropriate)
If you expect to exceed 4GB (are you sure?) then some options might include...
archive older data into a separate database
don't use sql-server express -- use a standard version that can grow.