Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: Jason O <zeugma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 22:51:43 +0100
On 8/5/06 18:57, in article Xns97BD8DED46380f99a49ed1d0c49c5bbb2@xxxxxxxxx,
"David W. Fenton" <XXXusenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"larsdennert@xxxxxxxxx" <larsdennert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1147107769.867911.107000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
Probably the copy process isn't closing the file properly and
either has it locked open or not flushed before disconnecting.
Well, that would assume that you're opening the same file that
you're copying.
If remote users are term-served in, why not just have them make
the changes locally?
Well, I can see having a TS connection being used to initialize the
installation on a remote machine. It's a clever idea that had never
occurred to me.
Why do you even need term serve to just copy a file, which is the
wrong way to implement the process anyway? They should either do
the above or have a permanent replica installed on their machine
that gets synch'd.
My reading is that the TS connection is what is used to do the
installation onto the local machine. That would actually make a
great deal of sense, particularly for users who can't rely on being
able to connect to the Terminal Server for long periods of time, but
still need to work. As long as they can sometimes connect, they'd be
able to set up the remote machine with its local replica and then
work disconnected.
The big issue for me is the fact that the thing is not split,
apparently. That's disastrous in the long run, without question.
Hi David, lars' comment is one that I've also been considering. As I said
in my o.p I'm a complete novice when it comes to replication (and I'm not
that experienced in Access to be honest :-) but if the remote users are
connecting to the office's public folder via Term Serve, then why have it
replicated at all? Why can't they simply use the P:\ drive database
directly?
After quizzing a few people at work today it would seem the replication was
set up in the belief that access is not a mulit-user application and by
having copies installed onto remote machines (then synching) this would
enable more than one person to use the database without any 'read only
nonsense' (a direct quote).
I have also since found out more details of the *actual* bottleneck. Once
one of the remote users has installed, used & synched, it would seem that
the database is then unavailable until the parent folder is deleted from the
Term Serve directory, so the remote users are having to liaise with each
other to arrange who is going to use it & then liaise with the company IT
department to delete the parent folder? So it seems Lars is right - the copy
process isn't closing the file properly and locking it open. So if I knew
how to sort that I'd have a temporary fix while I sort the other problems
:-)
Regards
Jason
___
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: David W. Fenton
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- References:
- New to Replication - Need Help
- From: Jason O
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: David W. Fenton
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: Jason O
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: Jason O
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: David W. Fenton
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: Jason O
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: David W. Fenton
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: larsdennert@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- From: David W. Fenton
- New to Replication - Need Help
- Prev by Date: Re: Synchronization History AWOL
- Next by Date: Re: Synchronization History AWOL
- Previous by thread: Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- Next by thread: Re: New to Replication - Need Help
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|