Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Windows XP - Networking - pb 3.2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Windows XP - Networking - pb 3.2

    Hi All ! !

    I have been using PB 3.2 (Dos) with (QpakPro.Inc – libraries) for the last few years and have developed a fully fledged point of sale system (www.mandla.co.za/compubyte) that includes full support for networking using the file and record locking functions of the compiler ( Lock# unlock# etc).

    This has worked extremely well with Novell/Windows servers as long as the clients to the servers were dos/win95/win98 . . .

    If an XP client logs onto the server and uses my program (in full window or smaller window)the following occurs :-

    1) 1st XP user can use/modify any of the files and work normally on the server even while other win98 clients are using the server - As soon as a 2nd XP user connects the win 98 clients don’t feel any degradation in speed however the 1st XP user starts to see searches/queries slowing down – Once the 3rd Xp user logs on the 1st xp user is totally locked out of the system or his program reports error: 75 (Access error) – The win 98 machines see no degradation or no error 75 is displayed.

    I would like to know what is the problem, could it be the following:-
    a) PB 3.2 wont work with XP
    b) The network protocol on the XP machines are pre set to use TCPIP – I have installed all other protocols that the win98 clients have and yet no difference – does PB 3.2 support on XP the record locking functions.
    c) I used the standard dos window (cmd) to run the programs – have tried using a win98 window yet the program reports error 75.

    Can someone please assist me . .

    Thanking you,

    Basit. www.witelafrica.net

    NB: I have purchased PB 3.2 - I have not used PB 3.5 because I could not get these files :-
    $INCLUDE "QPakPro.Inc"
    $INCLUDE "DefCnf.Inc"
    $INCLUDE "SetCnf.Inc"
    converted to use it in PB3.5 is there a quick way to do this ??

    ------------------
    JustBASit

    -------------------
    www.compubyte.co.za
    ------------------- [email protected]

  • #2
    This might be related to the "no access" thing..
    Source: Microsoft.public.basic.dos 12/30/02

    Hi !

    My company recently upgraded to win2k server.

    Our QB45 software (running on pc's in the win98SE environment) does
    alot of file access to the server, typically looking like this:

    OPEN filename FOR APPEND AS filenumber
    PRINT#filenumber, ...data
    PRINT#filenumber, ...data
    .
    .
    .
    PRINT#filenumber, ...data
    CLOSE filenumber

    plain and simple, except the "CLOSE" command is being *ignored* by the
    server. So, the files are being left "open" and cannot be accessed by
    other machines. (The local machines are convinced the CLOSE was
    carried out, no errors were trapped or reported) This problem is on
    multiple machines and randomly happens. Has anyone seen it before ??
    Our IT dept can manually close the files from the server, but this
    really is slowing things down !

    Thanks,
    John.

    REPLY

    [email protected] (John Connelly) wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > Hi !
    <snip>

    Hi back. This is an issue with NT based servers and non-NT based
    clients. Win2k is NT based. The non authenticated process that creates a file owns that file exclusively until the process terminates. Michael points out something like that in his reply. You could update to NT based clients (NT workstation or 2K professional)

    --
    ATB

    Charles Kincaid
    The speed thing I can't help you with, other than noting the each subsequent release of Windows has added approximately 16 bazillion 'system options' each of which may separately or in combination with other options have major effects on performance.

    MCM


    Michael Mattias
    Tal Systems Inc. (retired)
    Racine WI USA
    [email protected]
    http://www.talsystems.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Thank Michael . . .

      :-( My problem unfortunately is different - The NT SERVER 2000 allows all the DOS/win95/Win98 clients to open close files and handle all record locking etc, when you put an XP machine (more than 1) on as a client/`s and use my program (coded in PB 3.2) you start getting error 75 (access error) messages on the XP machines only . .


      Help me soooooooooooooooooomeONE ! ! !

      :-)

      BASit

      ------------------
      JustBASit

      -------------------
      www.compubyte.co.za
      ------------------- [email protected]

      Comment


      • #4
        hi

        i think any network programming in a nt enviroment must consider the
        term "opportunistic locking" on nt machines and be aware of what is going on
        and consider editing the registry to turn off the freaking thing.

        also you might try letting the server files be placed on a fat32 partition or a drive that is formated in fat32
        as opposed to ntfs partitions, i really like ntfs but i believe it(ntfs) might be part of our problems.


        i have been having similiar problems when i backup to a nt machine from a dos machine.
        when i copy over the files using a utility like xcopy from the dos to nt machine, and then try to erease some of the files
        on the nt machine from the dos machine, i will get access denied from the nt machine to the dos machines.
        when i reboot the nt server, i can then erase the files from the dos machine.
        our problems do seem very similar in nature.

        i do not really have nt servers, i have peer to peer computers acting as servers and use lantastic
        software as networking on a netbios protocol.

        keep us posted as to your finding though, you might have solved some of my problems as well.


        ------------------


        [This message has been edited by paul d purvis (edited October 08, 2003).]
        p purvis

        Comment


        • #5
          :-) Thanks Paul,

          . . However :-
          Originally posted by paul d purvis:
          hi...and consider the registry to turn off the freaking thing.


          Where and what in the registry do i turn of ??
          Originally posted by paul d purvis:
          ..let the server files be placed on a fat32 partition


          Why would my win98 clients have no such problem at all connecting to a win2000 server having NTFS -
          Am I correct in assuming that PB DOS can read and write to a NTFS server, however this read and write is not reliable and you could find files corrupted/data lost and unwarranted denied access hence error 75 - I wonder then if the #lock #unlock functions are working. . .

          I will be posting source code (few lines which will simulate the problem) as soon as I complete a test using 3 XP terminals connected to a WIN 2000 server using Fat32 and NTFS.

          Thanks Again . .

          BASit (wwww.witelafrica.net)


          ------------------


          [This message has been edited by Basit Bulbulia (edited October 09, 2003).]
          JustBASit

          -------------------
          www.compubyte.co.za
          ------------------- [email protected]

          Comment


          • #6
            ok
            i am just throwing some thoughts your way, so i am sure a lot of the
            senerios will not work, like you suggested the win98 machines are doing fine.

            on the "opportunitic locking" do a lookup on the internet.
            there you will find how to disable the feature.
            i am no expert on opportunistic locking but i have seen some warning
            sometime back at the beginning of the summer.

            here is another thought, not only flush or close the files, but write some other
            non significate data to a file on the server, to sort of clean the pipes in the network so to
            speak, in some program i write 32k of data to a file just to make sure all data prior the
            the 32k write have been sent to the server and it is not hanging around in some kind of buffer between
            my programs and the server disk drive.
            paul




            ------------------
            p purvis

            Comment

            Working...
            X