Cut all client connections

[ACS2013]

I am using vfp8 and have developed a CRM package. From time to time, I need to have the version upgrade. I just want to know how can I technically to disconnect all users from the system in order to put the new version in services. There are times even it seems all users are disconnected, however, the DBC is still not cleared and I need to disconnect the network connection from the server before things can be going on. I use network drive to hold the DBC and users are mapped to it to use the CRM package.

Please help, thanks a lot !

 

[Olaf Doschke]

See thread184-1704561

You can cut connections to open files, if you're admin. Ideally execute tht script at that server itself.

Bye, Olaf.

 

[Mike Lewis]

An alternative approach would be to store a separate copy of each DBC locally on the user's system (the DBFs, CDXs, etc. would remain on the server). That way, you would have no issue with closing the connection, plus you would get a gain in performance.

Mike

__________________________________
Mike Lewis (Edinburgh, Scotland)

Visual FoxPro articles, tips, training, consultancy

 

[EzLogic]

Mike,

i never thought you can do that.

have the dbc locally on each user's machine, yet the dbf's on the server.

how is it going to be in sync?

i am puzzled..

Ali Koumaiha
TeknoSoft Inc.
Michigan

 

[Olaf Doschke]

It's a bit tricky. DBFs point back to the DBC, so the multiple DBCs, one in each client, have to be in the same local drive letter in the same directory of the clients.

What's more common usage is having a local DBC with local views. These local views can point to DBFs on a remote central share, which contains either free DBFs or DBFs of another central DBC. But if a DBC is in play, the views would also open the central DBFs, which are then also locked in pessimisitc locking mode, if that's used.

I don't know what situation Mike is having in mind. I actually don't see how any of those two would help. ALTER TABLES would not work well with no central DBC in both situations and no situation would mean no DBF locks. So maybe Mike expands on what exactly is thinking of.

Overcoming the problem of a database update without disconnecting users can be easily done with MS SQL Server, for example.

Bye, Olaf.

 

[Mike Lewis]

I don't know what situation Mike is having in mind. ... So maybe Mike expands on what exactly is thinking of.

It's very simple: I was talking rubbish.

I was thinking of the case where the DBC only holds views (local or remote) rather than the actual DBFs. In those cases, there are clear performance and maintenance benefits in holding the DBCs locally, but of course they won't apply in this case.

Put it down to over-work and not enough sleep.

Mike

__________________________________
Mike Lewis (Edinburgh, Scotland)

Visual FoxPro articles, tips, training, consultancy

 

[Dan Freeman]

It's very simple: I was talking rubbish.

Whew! Here I was thinking I'd missed something important all these years! LOL