AREV performance on W2K & Novell (AREV Specific)
At 20 OCT 2001 06:31:29PM Dan Reese wrote:
Is anyone having success using AREV on a Windows 2000 workstation on a Novell network with the Revelation NLM? Ours is extremely slow! If you found a combination that works, please share… What versions (NetWare, Client, etc.), service packs (MS, Novell server and client), etc? If you use something other than default settings, such as for the Novell client, what settings do you use?
At 25 OCT 2001 01:13PM Don Miller - C3 Inc. wrote:
Dan ..
Not a bite. Strange. I have several clients who use Netware (4.x and 5.x) and the NLM as well / Arev (2.12 and 3.12) but not on Win2K desktops. Exclusively Win95/98. Maybe you should re-post to get it to the head of the class .
Don
At 25 OCT 2001 02:33PM Dan Reese wrote:
For a while I was asking if anyone was having problems, and got no response. Now I am looking for people who are having success, and haven't found anyone. Maybe there aren't many people using Windows 2000 and AREV on Novell…
At 25 OCT 2001 03:30PM Victor Engel wrote:
I was, but no longer. I don't remember all the details, except that it was Novell 4 on a network that was primarily Microsoft. I had problems setting up a shortcut, so what I actually did was to copy a PIF file that was created in Windows95 and use it. That seemed to work fine. I also bought a book that documents the PIF file format and did a bit of poking around, but I don't remember what I found out.
I didn't notice a performance problem. OTOH, by the time the office was converting to W2K, I wasn't using Arev as much anymore.
Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. Try the PIF copy trick, though. I think there may be some fields within it that do not get updated by the W2K pif editor.
At 26 OCT 2001 10:32AM Tim Henderson wrote:
Dan,
my understanding, from searching Novell's support database, is that this is primarily an issue w/ the Novell client for W2000 (Novell TID 10054007). Novell has reported that they are working on the issue, but their information has not been updated in a year. I've not seen a fix yet. Running in full-screen helps a bit, but not much. –Tim
At 26 OCT 2001 02:59PM Dan Reese wrote:
We are able to get the pif files to work OK, and single record operations are slow, but not obviously painful. Any operation that involves a large number of records, however, is unreasonably slow.
If you are not sure about your system, do a simple test. Copy a few thousand records: copy tableName * to:(anotherTableName. Do it once on a W95/98/ME/NT machine, then again on a Windows 2000 machine. I bet you will find Windows 2000 workstation on Novell to be at around 10 times slower.
At 26 OCT 2001 03:46PM Victor Engel wrote:
Unfortunately, I cannot do this. This was at my previous employer's location. I feel certain, though, that I would have noticed a 10-fold decrease in performance. I do remember that I was using the Microsoft driver because I had trouble getting the Netware driver to install (mainly because I did not have admin rights on my own machine).
At 29 OCT 2001 12:54AM Dan Reese wrote:
This TID says that 1) the presenting problem is that performance is slow, 2) it has been reported to engineering, 3) but that performance is acceptable.
It is clearly not acceptable for anyone doing anything substantial, and it is tedious at best for doing trivial things.
At 29 OCT 2001 12:59AM Dan Reese wrote:
It is hard to believe that it is as slow as it is, but we have benchmarked a number of systems, and it is.
If you run some sort of a benchmark and get decent results, make sure ServerOnly=True. It runs about 4 times faster without the NLM.