I read an earlier discussion about a Windows 95/98 network that indicated a requirement for a dedicated server. Does this mean that if I want to have a 3 user system using an AREV 3.12 application under Windows 95/98 peer to peer network, I'll need 4 computers because the 'server' cannot be used as a workstation to run my AREV 3.12 application?

Thanks,

J.J.

Jim..

No, you only need 3. Use the NPP and make sure that the server sets up the drive/directory where AREV is as a shared resource. Each workstation should map a network drive to the server. You may encounter serious performance issues beyond 4-5 users. The dedicated server requirement was for NT, which can also function in a peer-to-peer mode. In this case, the server's local C: drive cannot be seen by the server's client as a shared resource; hence, no locking will be performed.

Don Miller

C3 Inc.

This depends on what kind of server you decide to build. If you want a Novell server, it won't be able to work as a stand by alone server without other workstations connected to it –] it will be useless. Also, you will not be able to use it as a workstation.

If you are interested in the NT server you will be able to continue using a pier to pier network if you wish or you could connect the workstations to the server and make a real network. Plus, the NT server could be used as a workstation. This will be OK for your environment; although, it is not generally recommended for larger networks because the server could crash.

I hope this was helpful.

Marina

Revelation

you will be able to continue using a pier to pier network if you wish

Is this anything like a ship to shore network? Can I use a docking station with this? What sort of ports should I have? Is my data considered cargo? I didn't miss the boat on this, did I? I don't mean to make any waves. I don't want anyone getting stern.

garygnu@compuserve.com

Pier as in a Boat Dock

Peer as in equals - Peer to Peer Network. A jury of ones "Peers".

Gary,

We have 120 users each with their own server. These connect to a single workstation where all the files are kept centrally. I just have to figure out how to get all 120 NT services to talk to the one network driver on the sole workstation. If I reverse reads and writes in my application, will that help? I've tried switching all the lock and unlock statements, and that works to a point, but EVAL LOCK EVERYTHING isn't supported under AREV 3.12. Another frustrating problem is that the yield() statement actually won't accept a server parameter - I need to be able to specify which server gets priority.

Can you help?

Eric

The answer is actually dependent upon both your technical abilities,and you budget.

If you are technically competent at fixing GFE data corruption, mapping drives diferently for the server, and checking file locking is working correctly, then you can probably get away with 3 computers.

If however you like a simple life, and can afford only $500 more for a dedicated server, then buy 4 computers. This always works out best in my experience.

Isn't is appropriate that Marina suggested a pier to pier network?

First off, if your server is not performing the task, then I would suggest not tipping him (or her). As for the files, it is good that they are stored centrally, but is that the basic middle of the office, or a geographic central based on average distances of workstations from each other? You don't want to reverse reads and writes since that will give you sdaer and setirw which are names of ogors and they don't like being called. When you type their names, they will come to your office overnight and redecorate all your furniture and reverse the hot and cold taps in your plumbing. Interesting that you had to place switching on the lock and unlocks. I assumed you had the lock switch upgrade for 3.12. Originally ARev shipped with a button for locking and unlocking, but we found our users much prefered a switch so they can more easily see the state. Most of our users had the disconcerting problem of never being able to determine when it was actually in.

As for yield(), well, that's a design flaw. I remember having a conversation about this with the author of 3.12. He's a brilliant man, a wonderful humanitarian and gnuatarian and has a great head full of hair. Anyway, he reminded me about locking and the traffic light protocol. If you remember from the manuals, locking works like a traffic light, just because the light is red, some cheetah, high on catnip, can still go racing through at 70mph since the red light doesn't place a physical barrier across the road. Same with locking, it doesn't place a physical lock on the record, CD, cassette or 8-track, but places a logical lock.

So, what does this have to do with yield(). You see, taking the traffic analogy one step further, yield is like a yield sign. On the highway, the yield sign isn't configured to stop trucks or purple Peugots or VW Things, but all motorized vehicles. Thus this is how yield() works. It tells all the servers, or cars, to yield() to oncoming transactions or else drive on the median. I told the author I didn't follow his mode of thinking, but he told me I was just mean.

garygnu@compuserve.com

View this thread on the forum...