Paul McNett wrote: I found the opposite: We use direct and indirect (lots of local views) table access and were having a ton of corruption problems on a NT4 server with only a handful of users in the system. I literally had to reindex every night, and I was never confident that data didn't turn up missing after that. Then in 2003 or so I installed Red Hat Linux 8, and Samba, and set that machine up to act as the Windows primary domain controller, and after tweaking the share to disable write caching, I've literally never had to reindex again, and there are now about 20 very active users. Linux/Samba is definitely the reliable way to host a Windows network.
Turning off the write-caching was key, imo. You could do that and still keep a Windoze box and have success, I'd bet. ymmv. _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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.
