On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Michael Madigan <[email protected]> wrote: > For the first time in 24 years some users are getting the scrolling "Record > is not available" in FPW 2.5. This error is extremely annoying because it > can't be trapped by an error handler, and it has no error number.
That's because you're in a RETRY loop, and your REPROCESS settings aren't allowing it to fail and fall into the error handler. > There are 4 terminal services servers, 1 file server, and approximately 40 > users. > I have been told this happens on 2 unrelated programs each hosted on the same > server, although this is not verified. This makes me think this may not be > a software issue, hut instead a hardware issue. With the same information, my first thought that this was a network/OS locking configuration problem. > This started when 5 new employees started. Well, that's interesting! Are they using new machines? Are they configured the same way as the existing machines? Are they patched up-to-date? Are they running the same AV as the others? Same exclusions? That's where I'd look first -- the thing that last changed. You're running 16-bit FPW 2.5? How do you install it for the new employees? How do you patch it? Are the runtime libraries the same? How about the CONFIG.FPW? CONFIG.NT? What's the networking protocol? Are you running SMB 1, 2, or 3? How about oplocks? > It only happens for a few minutes then clears itself. It happens maybe 2 > times a day for 5-10 minutes and everyone has to wait. Sounds like a stale lock isn't getting cleared immediately. Hardware errors that clear up are more rare, though not impossible. > I think this is a hardware issue, where some rogue task is taking down the > file server's or terminal server's performance. I still don't get how this is "hardware." > The hardware guy seems to think it's a software issue, Well, yeah. > even though 2 separate, distinct programs are having issues and they don't > have any interaction between them. Don't they run the same runtimes, on the same OS, using the same network protocols, to talk to the same servers? -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ 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/cacw6n4tm__03mbdpwyyoby3wwxfpat6vxro+8+_tzxu4emv...@mail.gmail.com ** 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.
