I am trying to share an ACT 2000 database on a Samba shared network drive. Act does not currently support Samba shared networking but they do not see any reason why it should not work. Is anyone else out there using ACT in a multi-user environment over a Samba shared drive? If so what settings are you using for the "oplocks" and "level2 oplocks" for the share? Thanks, Paul. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
Oplocks should be disabled entirely on a share for multi-user database files. Even if there are no problems with oplock implementation, oplock benefits only exist in single user files. Note: Disabling oplocks should not be confused with disabling file locking. The later is *very* important for multi-user database files.... (And even though I greatly respect those who tell us that there are no known bugs with oplocks other than leaky networks, (ie, errors on the physical network layer and or NIC driver bugs.) and will readilty admit these people know *much* more than me on the subject, I personally still do not believe it.) On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Paul Adair wrote: I am trying to share an ACT 2000 database on a Samba shared network drive. Act does not currently support Samba shared networking but they do not see any reason why it should not work. Is anyone else out there using ACT in a multi-user environment over a Samba shared drive? If so what settings are you using for the "oplocks" and "level2 oplocks" for the share? Thanks, Paul.
On Tuesday 19 February 2002 10:18, Paul Adair wrote:> I am trying to share an ACT 2000 database on a Samba shared network drive. > Act does not currently support Samba shared networking but they do not see > any reason why it should not work. > > Is anyone else out there using ACT in a multi-user environment over a Samba > shared drive? If so what settings are you using for the "oplocks" and > "level2 oplocks" for the share?I assume that you're talking about the "database is corrupt" problem that occurs when a second person attempts to open a database? We've seen this, but have yet to find a workaround. I also haven't had much time to diagnose it and determine what causes it. It's purely an ACT! thing, Access databases and other types of shared access work fine, but ACT! is doing something in a broken manner. -- Bill Moran Potential Technology technical services http://www.potentialtech.com
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 12:26:42PM -0500, Rashkae wrote:> Oplocks should be disabled entirely on a share for multi-user database > files. Even if there are no problems with oplock implementation, oplock > benefits only exist in single user files. > > Note: Disabling oplocks should not be confused with disabling file > locking. The later is *very* important for multi-user database files.... > > (And even though I greatly respect those who tell us that there are no > known bugs with oplocks other than leaky networks, (ie, errors on the > physical network layer and or NIC driver bugs.) and will readilty admit > these people know *much* more than me on the subject, I personally still > do not believe it.)In that case, please send a *reproducible* test case :-). Jeremy