| Author |
Message |
|
Timothy Adame
#1 / 10
|
 JET Multi-user problem I was wondering if anybody is having a similar problem to this
one:
I have a client site with a multi-user Jet 2.5 (Access engine)
database. We're having problems with the database being
reported as corrupted whenever a network connections drops.
This is quite frequently as the particular server my app
resides on is an NT server with between 400 and 500 connections
using NetBUEI. There are never more that 30 users to the db at
any one time, but it seems that NT is dropping NetBUEI
connections quite frequently.
My questions is this: if the database isn't corrupted when
records aren't being corrupted or tables truncated(it's not
most of the time; the first page of the MDB and the LDB file
just aren't in agreement according to the MS Jet Engine
Programmers Guide), how do we fix such a problem without making
everybody in the domain log out, repair/compact, and call all
30 people back and say "OK go ahead until the next time it
barfs!"
I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
SQL server at $300 a seat...
Thanks in advance, and please cc any postings e-mail.
Timothy M. Adamec
|
| Sun, 18 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
 |
|
Mark Pickavan
#2 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem
Quote: >I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
>networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
>SQL server at $300 a seat...
What makes you think SQL server is $300 a seat?, the client licences are less that and the server (of which you only need 1 copy) is about twice that. Back to your problem.
I have experienced a very simliar problem, when I moved to NT from
Netware, my solution was to return to netware until I have my SQL
solution in place. If you only have 30 users accessing this database
is it possible to shift the files onto an indipendent server, and only
connect those users to that service?
Just a though.
Mr Pick'n'mix
|
| Mon, 19 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Luis Dur
#3 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem
Quote: >I was wondering if anybody is having a similar problem to this
>one:
>I have a client site with a multi-user Jet 2.5 (Access engine)
>database. We're having problems with the database being
>reported as corrupted whenever a network connections drops.
>This is quite frequently as the particular server my app
>resides on is an NT server with between 400 and 500 connections
>using NetBUEI. There are never more that 30 users to the db at
>any one time, but it seems that NT is dropping NetBUEI
>connections quite frequently.
>My questions is this: if the database isn't corrupted when
>records aren't being corrupted or tables truncated(it's not
>most of the time; the first page of the MDB and the LDB file
>just aren't in agreement according to the MS Jet Engine
>Programmers Guide), how do we fix such a problem without making
>everybody in the domain log out, repair/compact, and call all
>30 people back and say "OK go ahead until the next time it
>barfs!"
>I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
>networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
>SQL server at $300 a seat...
>Thanks in advance, and please cc any postings e-mail.
>Timothy M. Adamec
I was running an application and was having the same thing happen. Basically the same setup, but less people. The database would corrupt pretty frequently and there wasn't anything I could find to fix the problem. Oh, there was one thing, we moved to SQL Server... If you do hear something, let me know as I might run into the same situation again in the future. Luis
|
| Mon, 19 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Mik
#4 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem Quote: >What makes you think SQL server is $300 a seat?, the client licences
>are less that and the server (of which you only need 1 copy) is about
>twice that.
Yeah, but doesn't MS recommend a SQL server to be running on it's own box (separate from fileserver) ? That'll set him back a few thousand$
|
| Tue, 20 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Phoenix Business Enterpris
#5 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem Quote: >I have a client site with a multi-user Jet 2.5 (Access engine)
>database. We're having problems with the database being
>reported as corrupted whenever a network connections drops.
>This is quite frequently as the particular server my app
Welcome to Access. This is a known problem with it. Quote: >I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
>networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
>SQL server at $300 a seat...
Changing networks probably would not help. _
******************************************************************
NOTE: This software is currently in early alpha. If you notice any
-Please do not report duplicates, as this is usually a manual resend
-Still working on the references problem......It WILL get fixed
+------------------------------------------------------------+
|Physically in Church Hill, TN - Logically Not Sure |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Quote: >>SQUID - The ultimate 95/NT offline databasing reader
**Special Compile: 3.000A (Alpha)
|
| Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
S.Mille
#6 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem Quote:
> >I was wondering if anybody is having a similar problem to this
> >one:
> >I have a client site with a multi-user Jet 2.5 (Access engine)
> >database. We're having problems with the database being
> >reported as corrupted whenever a network connections drops.
> >This is quite frequently as the particular server my app
> >resides on is an NT server with between 400 and 500 connections
> >using NetBUEI. There are never more that 30 users to the db at
> >any one time, but it seems that NT is dropping NetBUEI
> >connections quite frequently.
> >My questions is this: if the database isn't corrupted when
> >records aren't being corrupted or tables truncated(it's not
> >most of the time; the first page of the MDB and the LDB file
> >just aren't in agreement according to the MS Jet Engine
> >Programmers Guide), how do we fix such a problem without making
> >everybody in the domain log out, repair/compact, and call all
> >30 people back and say "OK go ahead until the next time it
> >barfs!"
> >I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
> >networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
> >SQL server at $300 a seat...
> >Thanks in advance, and please cc any postings e-mail.
> >Timothy M. Adamec
> I was running an application and was having the same thing happen. Basically
> the same setup, but less people. The database would corrupt pretty frequently
> and there wasn't anything I could find to fix the problem. Oh, there was one
> thing, we moved to SQL Server... If you do hear something, let me know as I
> might run into the same situation again in the future.
> Luis
I had the same problem. No workaround. But instead of calling users to get them off the database, I implemented a routine with a timer event to periodically check the .ini file for a flag. This allowed us to force users to shut down. The apps would detect the flag and warn the user before cleanly shutting down. This helped, but very frustrating...
|
| Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Trevor Be
#7 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem On 1 May 1996 16:36:53 GMT in comp.databases.ms-access, Timothy Adamec
Quote:
>I was wondering if anybody is having a similar problem to this
>one:
>I have a client site with a multi-user Jet 2.5 (Access engine)
>database. We're having problems with the database being
>reported as corrupted whenever a network connections drops.
>This is quite frequently as the particular server my app
>resides on is an NT server with between 400 and 500 connections
>using NetBUEI. There are never more that 30 users to the db at
>any one time, but it seems that NT is dropping NetBUEI
>connections quite frequently.
>My questions is this: if the database isn't corrupted when
>records aren't being corrupted or tables truncated(it's not
>most of the time; the first page of the MDB and the LDB file
>just aren't in agreement according to the MS Jet Engine
>Programmers Guide), how do we fix such a problem without making
>everybody in the domain log out, repair/compact, and call all
>30 people back and say "OK go ahead until the next time it
>barfs!"
>I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
>networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
>SQL server at $300 a seat...
But moving to a server that doesn't drop connections would be the wise move, broken net connection = corrupt database, that's it. Why is changing net/protocols not an option? I'd say the
network/infrastructure should be set to support what it's gotta support,
if it breaks down all the time, fix it no matter what it takes, this
network/server is doing more harm than good, if you have one of these net
admin guys that dictates everything and is obviously not helping matters
then get him replaced, a server that breaks connections like that has no
place in *any* network, you haven't got a network, you've got a notwork.
\|||/
/ \
C o o D
-----------------ooO--u--Ooo-------------------------------
If smoking's so bad for you, why does it cure kippers?
|
| Fri, 23 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Trevor Be
#8 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem On 1 May 1996 16:36:53 GMT in comp.databases.ms-access, Timothy Adamec
Quote:
>I was wondering if anybody is having a similar problem to this
>one:
>I have a client site with a multi-user Jet 2.5 (Access engine)
>database. We're having problems with the database being
>reported as corrupted whenever a network connections drops.
>This is quite frequently as the particular server my app
>resides on is an NT server with between 400 and 500 connections
>using NetBUEI. There are never more that 30 users to the db at
>any one time, but it seems that NT is dropping NetBUEI
>connections quite frequently.
>My questions is this: if the database isn't corrupted when
>records aren't being corrupted or tables truncated(it's not
>most of the time; the first page of the MDB and the LDB file
>just aren't in agreement according to the MS Jet Engine
>Programmers Guide), how do we fix such a problem without making
>everybody in the domain log out, repair/compact, and call all
>30 people back and say "OK go ahead until the next time it
>barfs!"
>I'll save most people the trouble of responding: changing
>networks or protocols is not an option, neither is moving to an
>SQL server at $300 a seat...
But moving to a server that doesn't drop connections would be the wise move, broken net connection = corrupt database, that's it. Why is changing net/protocols not an option? I'd say the
network/infrastructure should be set to support what it's gotta support,
if it breaks down all the time, fix it no matter what it takes, this
network/server is doing more harm than good, if you have one of these net
admin guys that dictates everything and is obviously not helping matters
then get him replaced, a server that breaks connections like that has no
place in *any* network, you haven't got a network, you've got a notwork.
\|||/
/ \
C o o D
-----------------ooO--u--Ooo-------------------------------
If smoking's so bad for you, why does it cure kippers?
|
| Fri, 23 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Trevor Be
#9 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem Sorry for the dubble post, it's taking 1 - 2 mins to post one message
ATM, I aborted this one, my reader must have resent it when I resumed
later on.
|
| Fri, 23 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|
Mark Pickavan
#10 / 10
|
JET Multi-user problem Quote:
>>What makes you think SQL server is $300 a seat?, the client licences >>are less that and the server (of which you only need 1 copy) is about >>twice that. >Yeah, but doesn't MS recommend a SQL server to be running on it's own
>box (separate from fileserver) ? That'll set him back a few thousand$
The more users you have the smaller per seat impact, but... What we are really talking about here is the difference between a system that works, and one that doesn't. And the current solution, however cheap, appears to fall into that catagory. So complaints about how much one that would work seem to be irrelevent to me. Mr Pick'n'mix
|
| Sat, 24 Oct 1998 03:00:00 GMT |
|
| |
|
