Locking & Citrix (AREV Specific)
At 22 MAR 2001 04:20:30PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
We use ARev3.12 on a W2000 Server, and a Citrix Winframe3.8 server.
Every user logging in, signs in with on the W2000 server and in Arev, but everybody gets @station=0*RPPFRAME".
Who can we avoid the resulting locking/unlocking problems?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Wilhelm
At 22 MAR 2001 04:25PM w schmitt wrote:
Oops - there were too many typos - so here it goes again…
We use ARev3.12 on a W2000 Server, and a Citrix Winframe3.8 server.
Every user signs in with his ID on the W2000 server and in ARev, but everybody gets @station=0*RPPFRAME".
How can we avoid the resulting locking/unlocking problems?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Wilhelm
At 22 MAR 2001 04:40PM [url=http://www.sprezzatura.com" onMouseOver=window.status=Click here to visit our web site?';return(true)]The Sprezzatura Group[/url] wrote:
You could use the trick presented here to set your station id.
World Leaders in all things RevSoft
At 23 MAR 2001 10:57AM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
Could you be a little bit more specific for ARev?
Thanks
Wilhelm
At 23 MAR 2001 11:50AM [url=http://www.sprezzatura.com" onMouseOver=window.status=Click here to visit our web site?';return(true)]The Sprezzatura Group[/url] wrote:
Sorry Wilhelm, missed the OBVIOUS Category!!!
We do have a callable function to change @Station but there is probably a better way of doing this. I'll let others chip in…
World Leaders in all things RevSoft
At 23 MAR 2001 12:25PM Donald Bakke wrote:
How about a treatise on why @STATION is critical for locking and other native AREV/OI processes to work correctly. I know this is the consensus but it's been so long since I've studied the issue that this has become more faith than science for me. (Not to mention that we have never experienced any problems with locking or otherwise on WinTS systems.)
At 23 MAR 2001 12:49PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
Our problem is this:
During several file-writing processes, we have a couple of locking/unlocking routines, which work fine on any LAN-station. However, when it comes do accomplish the same tasks through a Citrix client, somewhere in the locking scheme we get confusion, and are no longer able to lock/unlock.
We guess that this is related to @station, because LAN users show different values each session, while all Citrix clients come in the same as @station=0*RPPFRAME".
Has someone experienced a similar situation?
Wilhelm
PD: Our Citrix Winframe package is ver 1.8
At 23 MAR 2001 12:59PM [url=http://www.sprezzatura.com" onMouseOver=window.status=Click here to visit our web site?';return(true)]The Sprezzatura Group[/url] wrote:
What network driver are you using?
World Leaders in all things RevSoft
At 23 MAR 2001 01:15PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
We use "ALL NETWORKS"
Wilhelm
At 23 MAR 2001 03:08PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
Network summary:
File Server WINDOWS 2000
ARev 3.12, unlimited user license
NT Service for AREV LH.
Network protocol: TCP/IP
ARev driver: All networks
Citrix: Winframe 1.8 (25 users)
Workstations: mainly Win95, some Win2000
At 29 MAR 2001 11:01AM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
Donald,
you are absolutely right: With time passing many things become more faith than science.
Due to the lack of Windows NT to provide information on who has the lock, some time ago we added phantom locking (through an MFS), which checks for @station, @user, @datafile and @id. However, we use an internal user verification scheme, giving @user most of the time the same value.
On the LAN this didn't bother, because each @station is different, but over the WAN (Citrix) it collapsed under certain circumstances.
Thanks for your comment.
Wilhelm
At 29 MAR 2001 11:46AM [url=http://www.sprezzatura.com" onMouseOver=window.status=Click here to visit our web site?';return(true)]The Sprezzatura Group[/url] wrote:
Wilhelm
We have more info on this but would prefer to take our part of the discussion offline, please drop an email to [email protected].
Regards
World Leaders in all things RevSoft
At 29 MAR 2001 08:23PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:
I forgot to add, that we now fixed the problem in our LOCKS.MFS
At 06 SEP 2001 07:36AM D Reese wrote:
How did you fix it?