Database Design Models And Database Management Systems

Contents

TOC o “1-3” h z u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc378047433 h 0Differences between DBMS PAGEREF _Toc378047434 h 0Differences between Database Design Models DBMS PAGEREF _Toc378047435 h 3Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc378047436 h 4

IntroductionA database management systems (DBMS) refers to a collection of programs that enable users to store, extract and modify data from a database (Kruk et al, 1996). On the other hand, a database design model refers to a plan describing objects represented by a computer system together with their relationships and properties. It describes real world objects such as orders, customers, suppliers, employees and products. This paper identifies three types of database management systems, describes them and compares and contrasts them. As well, it examines similarities and differences between database design models and DBMS.

Differences between DBMSDBMS Description Comparison

Microsoft Access This is a DBMS that combines graphical user interface with relational Microsoft jet database engine. It stores data based on the Access Jet Database Engine (Davidson, 2001). As well, it directly imports data that is stored in other databases or applications. As Davidson (2001) explains, this system facilitates storage and retrieval of data from computer’s hard drive. It is used for data sharing, long-term data storage and data manipulation and collection. According to Davidson (2001), users of Microsoft access systems can create reports, forms, queries and tables and connect them with micro. Microsoft access is easy to use in comparison with other systems. According to Davidson (2001), it can handle large number of records compared to the other systems. However, it is slow in performance compared to SQL Server system (Rhine, 1996). Like the other DBMS, Microsoft access allows access to a database by more than one user. However, it does not operate well when a database e is accessed by more than five persons, unlike SQL Server and client-server systems (Rhine, 1996).

Also, Microsoft Access has no ability to implement stored procedures, transaction logging and database triggers, like the Client-server relational DBMS do (Rhine, 1996). Unlike the other two servers, the latest version of Microsoft Access system stored procedures and table-level triggers that are built into ACE data engine. Also, Access is able to build reports, forms, queries, tables and Macros from the web, unlike Microsoft SQL Server and Client-server relational DBMS (Rhine, 1996).

Microsoft (structured query language) SQL Server system This is a relational DBMS developed by Microsoft, whose main function is to store and retrieve data on the same computer or others across a network (Stonebraker, 2010). Its scope includes schema creation and modification, query, data insert, update and delete and data access control. It is also used to create enterprise, web-based and desktop database applications. According to Stonebraker (2010), this system can be used together with Microsoft access as an alternative to jet database engine. It is compatible with Microsoft Access to the extent that SQL statements can be used directly in Micro to manipulate access tables and queries from Access can be edited as SQL statements (Stonebraker, 2010). It is used to store and retrieve data in computer systems, just like Microsoft Access (Rhine, 1996). It is also based on relational database model, just like Microsoft Access and Client-server relational database management systems (Rhine, 1996). It is also similar to Client-server and SQL Server systems in that it allows many clients to use the same server at the same time. However, it is not as easier to use and may not be able to handle large Microsoft Access and large number of data compared to access (Rhine, 1996).

Client-server relational DBMS This system is developed based on client-server models and is used in partitioning workloads or tasks between providers of service or resource, known as servers and service requesters, known as clients (Roesch & Henry, 1997). It enables clients to communicate with servers over the same computer but on different hardware. Also, it allows a server and a client to reside in the same system. A server hosts clients and runs one or more programs. A client using this system does not share any of its resources but requests service function or server’s content (Roesch & Henry, 1997). Thus, servers await incoming requests from clients. Both the server and the client exchange information in a request-response messaging pattern. A computer may be a server, a client or both and can serve multiple roles. For instance, one computer may run file server software and web server at the same time to relay different types of information requested by clients (Roesch & Henry, 1997). This system is similarly to Microsoft Access and Microsoft SQL Server system in that it is based on relational database management model (Rhine, 1996).. Unlike the above two systems, this system implements transaction logging, stored procedures and database triggers. As well, it is more difficult to use and handles less amount of data in comparison with Microsoft Access (Rhine, 1996).

Differences between Database Design Models DBMSOne similarity between database a design model and a DBMS is that both contain a schema containing a description of information within a database (Kruk et al, 1996). Secondly, both use tables or diagrams to describe information within a database. Third, both describe set of program modules which carry out functions such as data validating and selection. Further, Kruk et al (1996) explain that both may range from predefined features that are completely rigid to flexible. In addition, they are all developed to meet predefined requirements of commercial organizations. As well, both describe a way in which many users can access or use information in a database at the same time (Kruk et al, 1996). Lastly, both are developed based on specific business rules, depending on how activities are carried out within a particular organization.

However, there are also several differences between databases design models and DBMS. To start with, a DBMS is software that is designed to store, manipulate, retrieve and query information within a database. On the other hand, a database design model is simply a plan which is used as a reference for developing a database system (Kruk et al, 1996). Unlike in a DBMS, entity types in a database design model are often not identified or are incorrectly identified. This often leads to replication of information, functionality and data structure in a database design model, a feature that is not present in a DBMS (Kruk et al, 1996). In a database design model, data cannot be shared electronically with users such as employees, suppliers and customers since its meaning and structure has been standardized. On the contrary, a DBMS facilitates sharing of data among users since there are defined standards to ensure than information meets business needs (Kruk et al, 1996).

ConclusionIn conclusion, there are many DBMS with distinct properties and applications. Examples of common DBMS are Microsoft Access, client-server relational DBMS and Microsoft SQL Server system, as noted in the paper. The paper has also examined the differences between database design models and DBMS. In general, a database design model can be described as a plan that is used as a reference for developing a database system while a DBMS is software designed to manage information within a database.

References

Davidson, B. H, (2001), Database driven, dynamic content delivery: providing and managingaccess to online resources using Microsoft Access and Active Server Pages, OCLC Systems & Services, 17(1), pp. 34 – 42Kruk, A. Westerland, T. & Peter, K. (1996). Database Management Systems: Linking up acompany’s communications, both external and internal, Engineering Journal 103(5), p. 82Rhine, L. (1996), The development of a journal evaluation database using Microsoft ACCESS,Serials Review, 1996, 22 (4), pp. 27 – 34Roesch L. & Henry, L. J. (1997), Client/server systems. The Internal Auditor. 54(4), p. 40Stonebraker, M, (2010), SQL databases v. NoSQL databases, Communications of the ACM,53(4), pp. 10 – 11