Novell w/ win2k or XP

[JaneJantz]

Has anyone tried to run a FPW 2.6 application on Win2000 or WinXP workstation with a Novell server? I have several customers trying to do this. Win98 and Win95 work fine, but I suspect something in the Novell client software for win 2K and XP that is keeping the application from running (actually, it runs, but extremely slowly). Just loading the application takes 5 minutes on a new computer with much speed and ram.

The hardware techs blame FPW 2.6 for being a 16 bit application, saying that is the problem. I have not tested VFP with this setup, but would be interested if anyone is doing this.

Personally, we are using Win2K server with 2K,XP,98, and 95 workstations... these work well together. It seems Novell is the problem... Am I right? Any comments?

 

[rgbean]

Are you actually using the current Novell clents on 2000/XP (I believe 4.83), or the Microsoft Netware client? What version on Novell server are you running? While I've seen the initial connection to volume on a Novell server can take more time, it's not an on-going problem - unless the server wasn't configured with enough memory per user.

Rick

 

[JaneJantz]

This is a fairly new server running the latest Novell with 100 users. The existing workstations were all win98 and win95 and ran the FPW26 application very well.

Then, they added 4 new workstations, all running win2k, that cannot seem to run the same FPW26 application. I believe they are running the latest Novell client for win2K available.

The hardware/network technicians are telling me that this is a problem with 16 bit applications running on win2k. I run the same application here totally on a win2k server with 50 clients with no problem.

I am having the same problem in another city, running Novell also, that is trying to put on a WinXP workstation... showing the same problems. I can't help but think that Novell and Microsoft are having some problems here.
I know they are using the latest Novell clients for Win XP and Win 2k, but looking at Novell's support forum, someone just reported a problem with opening files on mapped drives taking 5 to 10 seconds to open. This could be the problem.

I was just wondering if anyone had the same configuration out there and if they had it working. Would moving this app to VFP solve all my problems? Or is this a 2K/XP problem with Novell?

Thanks.

 

[glhahn]

I ran a small fpd26 compiled utility from a 4.11 server on w2k box(P3, 1gig, 256meg). Load time was about 5 seconds. Run time was about 30 secs. I ran the same uitlity from a w98 box(PII, 350, 128) load time was again about 5 secs run time was about 18 seconds. I will say I notice a siginificant delay everytime I access a drive (local or network) on all of the w2k boxes I have. I believe it began after I installed NAV enterpirse by I can't documnent it.

--glh

 

[rgbean]

Any virus checker running on the file server can dramatically effect file access times IF they aren't configured properly. Make sure .DBF, .FPT, .CDX and .IDX files are excluded from realtime scanning. Otherwise every time you make a change data change, the entire file will be re-scanned - this can really slow things up, especially on large files!

Rick

 

[JaneJantz]

I have disabled the virus scanning... yes, found that to be the case with new Dell computers especially; however, this is still not the problem here.

It is unique to Novell servers with Win2K and XP workstations. Just loading the application is taking minutes.... the workstation is in idle mode most of the time. I still suspect a client problem.

Has anyone gotten this configuration to run?

 

[rgbean]

Yes, I just fired up a FPW 2.6a application we market. The code file is 10,963KB, it accesses ~200 tables. It's made up of 465 Program files, 372 Screen Sets, 214 Reports, 8 Labels, a menu and 15 miscellaneous files. Both the code and data are on a Novell 5.00h server. (I'm not sure about it's hardware specifics - the server people have all gone home tonight. But I do know it's not very "current", since I haven't seen any upgrade requests for more than a year.)

I'm running XP Pro, using the Novell 4.83 client on an Intel 100 Mbps NIC (half duplex), through a hub. (While my system is a bit more than the typical user workstation, it's currently got a lot of other stuff running on it. It's a dual processor 2.0gHz Xeon, with 512MB RAM and 2 Ultra 160 SCSI hard drives. I'm running two copies of SETI @ HOME, Outlook XP, QuickView Plus, Norton Ant-virus [w/ auto protect], 2 Exlorer windows, 2 copies of I.E. 6.0, FPW 2.6a dev environment as well as the Runtime, and I was playing a CD in RealPlayer - not to mention all the "standard" background services.)

The application fires up almost instantly, and large queries / reports seem to work just fine.

In the Config.FPW I set the temp files to a local drive and have a MEMLIMIT = 60, 2048, 16384.

I'm not sure what else I can tell you about my setup, but if there is something I've missed, please let me know.

Rick

 

[JaneJantz]

Thanks so much.... I don't know where to go next on this issue. I am meeting with the hardware/technicians in the morning to go over the configuration.

The problem is that I sell this application to end-users and their techs come in and tell them that it is my software that is bad because it is 16-bit old architecture and will not run on win2k or XP. I run it on both, but not on Novell.

As usual, the techs are looking for any excuse to blame the software. I am ready to accept blame if the blame is mine, but they are currently running my application on their Novell system with win98 with no problems.

We retired our Novell server when Win2K came out so do not have a good test base anymore.

I sell a large service/dispatch application to users all over the US. We have to depend on their local techs to set their networks up properly, which leaves us vulnerable to them bad-mouthing our app in front of the customer. We are not on-site with them, and have to have these discussions over the phone.

Recently, we put the application on the internet and have started porting our customers over, but this will take some time to convince some of them to change. In the meantime, I must deal with the local techs.

I have the application ready to run on VFP and will give them the new object modules, but I really doubt if that will solve the problem. Next, they will tell me it is FoxPro that is the problem.

Sorry, had to vent...

 

[rgbean]

Jane,
I got the specs on our Novell server:
CPU (speed): PII 350 mhz
Memory: 320 MB
Hard Disk(s): Mirrored 9gig & Mirrored 18gig (5 logical drives)
NIC(s): One integrated
OS: Netware 5.1 (No service pack), apparently 5.00h IS 5.1
We currently have an 75 user license and usally 25-30 users always working with files on the server.

Note: My tech guy also stated that Win2000 does seem to show slower access than XP. He also reminds me that "... some problems go away when you turn off the "file caching" in the advanced setup..." in the Netware Client. (The Novell support site recommends a number of changes to the client defaults for database use and FoxPro applications in particular.)

Rick

 

[jamesch]

It looks like the problems lies in the 16bit program you are using, not Win2000 or Novell. I have a MS doc for you to lookup, Q279792. This will enable Win2000 to run older programs under older OS's like Win 95-98. This is called Application Compatibility-Mode. You must have sp2 or sp3.
Go to |start|run|and type|regsvr32 %systemroot%\apppatch\slayerui.dll
Then go into the properties of the shortcut, and you will find a new tab "Compatibility". I have done this on our network, and older programs that my boss is too cheap to upgrade!!! Go figure!!!
I hope this works for you,

Curtis,

Lead, Follow, or Get out of the way!!!!!!
USAF

 

[DarrenWard]

We are running FPD2.6a apps on a Novell 6.0 server across all windows platforms with no problems now, although did have the same win2k and xp issues that you are experiencing.

The server is a Dell PowerEdge 4400, Dual PIII 1.1GHz xeon with 2GB RAM and a 1Gig fibre back plane and it ran like a dog with the standard client settings, one of my guys worked on it for a week befor sorting the problem out, I will speak to him in the morning and post what we used as a solution to the problem.

Dazz
GuiltyMaggot - The best rock band in the world!

 

[DarrenWard]

Not sure what is heppening then.
Says I have FoxPro 2.6a (X) in the about but get;

Collating sequence 'General' not found.

I don't seem to have any Collate options availible apart from 'Machine'. This is the last part of a problem that I have had ongoing for months.

The post I made in the v3.0 and above forum regarding rebuilding the structure with collate='general' sorted out the .CDX incompatablity issue but the Rushmore will not work unless the collate is set to general in any version.

Dazz GuiltyMaggot - The best rock band in the world!

 

[DarrenWard]

Appologies, the above post was intended for another thread.

Dazz GuiltyMaggot - The best rock band in the world!