"It works on my system." Always a satisfying answer to give a customer... :-) I'm sure there are differences in the way that our respective applications access and update data. But there are way too many variables to compare my experience with that of you or your ex-partner who never have these problems. These are Windows environments after all; not Macs. ;-)
I agree it's perplexing. I have some clients who have not run into problems and others where stability only returned by falling back to the original SMB protocol, turning off OpLocks and disabling write caching. (Maxing out the automatic timeout of network shares that is the newer Windows default has also been helpful.) Any benefit from potential performance boosts in having the newer defaults enabled are not worth the aggravation of intermittent data corruption. It wasn't my intention to blame anyone (despite my use of the word "bad" or any other inadvertent editorializing); just offer up my experiences to whoever started this thread. Like others here, I have clients running my application in disparate environments all over the place (in my case 60+ sites on 4 continents) and very few of them have the expertise or the time to perform hardcore system or network diagnostics. The bottom line for me has been when I start getting reports of issues like this my first reaction is to make sure they are using the settings recommended for Vista and later that I've referenced here. This has been an effective and mostly understandable solution for those of my clients who have been running into data corruption. -- rk ________________________________________ From: ProfoxTech [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dan Covill [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 3:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: VFP9: File Read Error on an Index File: Windows 8 Richard, I find this perplexing, because these problems sure aren't happening to me, nor to my ex-partner, who has a DBF-based system running at 20 large installations. Assuming you're not related to Joe Btfsplk, I'd be looking at hardware/network/system problems. You're blaming poor design, but if it was design I'd think we'd all be seeing the results. Dan Covill On 07/04/13 11:38 AM, Richard Kaye wrote: > I'm sure there are valid technical reasons for the evolution of SMB > protocols, opportunistic locking behaviors, write-caching, etc. But it > doesn't really help me if my files are trashed in the name of performance. > IMHO file integrity needs to trump performance. _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/DF1EEF11E586A64FB54A97F22A8BD044228264DFF7@ACKBWDDQH1.artfact.local ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
