Hi,
Just ran into an issue when running a 2nd completely different vfp instance (different table and different code) using the same odbc connection string to the same sql server. The 2nd instance interrupts and kills the 1st instance at the odbc layer. Let me explain in detail...
1. Client side: VFPsp2 on XP, Server side: SQL 2012, (not express)
2. Two identical apps, (each app contains data for a specific location) in 2 entirely different folders, (nothing shared between the 2 apps, purely standalone)
3. Each app is working with an entirely different sql database on the sql side,
4. Each app uses the same odbc connection string the lands on the master sql database initially, then changes context to its specific database and starts to work,
5. Fire up one of the apps and all is well,
6. Fire up the 2nd app, and after a few seconds app one starts generating connectivity errors on every process thereafter. (I have to interrupt the vfp process and start over after the running one completes)
7. At this point, I'm not sure if both vfp processes are compromised, but its behavior suggests that it is.
Any idea what is going on here?
Thanks, Stanley
Just ran into an issue when running a 2nd completely different vfp instance (different table and different code) using the same odbc connection string to the same sql server. The 2nd instance interrupts and kills the 1st instance at the odbc layer. Let me explain in detail...
1. Client side: VFPsp2 on XP, Server side: SQL 2012, (not express)
2. Two identical apps, (each app contains data for a specific location) in 2 entirely different folders, (nothing shared between the 2 apps, purely standalone)
3. Each app is working with an entirely different sql database on the sql side,
4. Each app uses the same odbc connection string the lands on the master sql database initially, then changes context to its specific database and starts to work,
5. Fire up one of the apps and all is well,
6. Fire up the 2nd app, and after a few seconds app one starts generating connectivity errors on every process thereafter. (I have to interrupt the vfp process and start over after the running one completes)
7. At this point, I'm not sure if both vfp processes are compromised, but its behavior suggests that it is.
Any idea what is going on here?
Thanks, Stanley