XML vs. SQlite vs. Access

calendar_today Asked Dec 22, 2009
thumb_up 8 upvotes
history Updated April 14, 2026

Direct Answer

I would consider using NHibernate, you can hook it up to SQLite, but can upgrade later to a full database later without needing to change much code. If you're not keen on this, I…. This is an advisory response with reference links, ranked #34th of 67 by community upvote score, from 2009.


The Problem (Q-score 5, ranked #34th of 67 in the Access VBA archive)

The scenario as originally posted in 2009

Question: We’ve started a project for a customer, which includes what would normally be done with a database.

However, the customer wants no database installed, since it’s only a little application.
We however intend to reuse the code for a larger project, which will use a database.

The problem is all the server side code will be different if I’m using XML or SQlite or Access.

I’m tending towards SQlite, but I don’t know.
Would adding the database in an MS-Access file be a better solution?
If I would put it into an access database, does the customer need MS-Access installed or only the MSFT MDAC ? If I use the Access DB, will that run under Linux with Mono, too, or is there no MDAC replacement ?

Why community consensus is tight on this one

Across 67 Access VBA entries in the archive, the accepted answer here holds niche answer (below median) status — meaning voters are unusually aligned on the right fix.


The Verified Solution — niche answer (below median) (+8)

Advisory answer — community consensus with reference links

Note: the verified answer below is a reference / advisory response rather than a copy-ready snippet.

I would consider using NHibernate, you can hook it up to SQLite, but can upgrade later to a full database later without needing to change much code. If you’re not keen on this, I would use SQLite directly over XML files.


When to Use It — vintage (14+ years old, pre-2013)

Ranked #34th in its category — specialized fit

This pattern sits in the 74% tail relative to the top answer. Reach for it when your scenario closely matches the question title; otherwise browse the Access VBA archive for a higher-consensus alternative.

What changed between 2009 and 2026

The answer is 17 years old. The Access VBA object model has been stable across Office 2013, 2016, 2019, 2021, 365, and 2024/2026 LTSC, so the pattern still compiles. Changes that might affect you: 64-bit API declarations (use PtrSafe), blocked macros in downloaded files (Mark-of-the-Web), and the shift toward Office Scripts for web-first workflows.

help
Frequently Asked Questions

This is a below-median answer — when does it still fit?
expand_more

Answer score +8 vs the Access VBA archive median ~4; this entry is niche. The score plus 5 supporting upvotes on the question itself (+5) means the asker and 7 subsequent voters all validated the approach.

This answer links out — what are the reference links worth following?
expand_more

Read the first external link for the canonical reference, then search this archive for a top-10 entry in the same category — advisory answers are best paired with a ranked code snippet to close the loop.

This answer is 17 years old. Is it still relevant in 2026?
expand_more

Published 2009, which is 17 year(s) before today’s Office 2026 build. The Access VBA object model has had no breaking changes in that window. Three things to re-test: (1) blocked macros on downloaded files (Mark-of-the-Web), (2) 64-bit API declarations (PtrSafe, LongPtr), (3) any shift toward Office Scripts for web scenarios.

Which Access VBA pattern ranks just above this one at #33?
expand_more

The pattern one rank above is “Forcing a datatype in MS Access make table query”. If your use case overlaps, compare both before committing.

Data source: Community-verified Q&A snapshot. Q-score 5, Answer-score 8, original post 2009, ranked #34th of 67 in the Access VBA archive. Last regenerated April 14, 2026.