Jim Lawrence (AccessD)
accessd at shaw.ca
Wed Mar 5 00:22:00 CST 2003
That explains why it was such a task to get the server and Promise RAID to working right. Wasted a whole afternoon... The OS is Win2000 Advanced Server and the motherboard was an $150.00 CAN (about $95.00 US), 1700MHz ASUS with RAID tech built-in. It has all worked flawlessly for over a year. Two mirrored 80GB drives and one 160GB for network backup. All kidding aside getting the right drivers to stabilize everything took awhile but now it is working perfectly. So the conventional wisdom from Dell and MS isn't always so. Mind you it is only RAID 2. To install RAID 5 would cost over a $1000.00 more in hardware. Jim -----Original Message----- From: accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Drew Wutka Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:39 PM To: 'accessd at databaseadvisors.com' Subject: RE: [AccessD] Access XP and 97 hang on reattaching linked tables under WinXP Just to explain for William....he was told by both Microsoft and Dell that you couldn't put a RAID5 on the same physical drive as the OS volume. From what I understand, it was in reference to an SBS system though (Small Business Server). So it is possible that the OS shipping with the SBS system has 'disabled' capabilities. William said he is going to test this out. Drew -----Original Message----- From: Jim Lawrence (AccessD) [mailto:accessd at shaw.ca] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:32 PM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: RE: [AccessD] Access XP and 97 hang on reattaching linked tables under WinXP The old tale of SCSIs being quicker than IDE has finally fallen. The new IDE drives can now match the best SCSI drives, file for file. Up to three drives, IDEs can be put on a single cable from one mother connector, as long as you let the drive select and don't hard set them. (15 from a SCSI adapter.) Many inexpensive motherboards come with Promise RAID technology built in so you can even RAID you IDE drives. My two cents worth. :-) Jim -----Original Message----- From: accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of William Hindman Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:16 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] Access XP and 97 hang on reattaching linked tables under WinXP ...lol ...I'm still wondering how you "Get three hard drives. (SCSI...but that may be a bit expensive....), Mirror the OS, and RAID a data drive (you can do all of that in Disk Management...with Windows 2000, no RAID controller necessary.)" ...this must be a Drew style RAID configuration that would leave the people at MS gasping in amazement! :)))) William Hindman ----- Original Message ----- From: "Drew Wutka" <DWUTKA at marlow.com> To: <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:57 AM Subject: RE: [AccessD] Access XP and 97 hang on reattaching linked tables under WinXP > Hmmmm, not a bad idea for a new 'cheap' brand name server .... "Drew style" > .... > > Drew > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gustav Brock [mailto:gustav at cactus.dk] > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:41 AM > To: Seth Galitzer > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Access XP and 97 hang on reattaching linked > tables under WinXP > > > Hi Seth > > I can't believe you're still struggling with this. We have never > encountered a scenario that comes even close to what you describe. > > Which protocol(s) are you running? > Have you tried setting up an isolated test environment? > (You can use a "Drew style" server for this!) > > Don't you have a nearby Novell/database guru to work with on this? > > /gustav > > > > Relinking to a BE on Novell is panifully slow even on Win98 machines. > > I've tried optimizing it, but it still takes up to four seconds for each > > table on Win98, and even longer on 2K or XP machines. Unfortunately, > > the problem doesn't appear to be the relinker itself. Using the > > built-in Linked Table Manager is still painfully slow. As a result I am > > "this close" to moving everything to a real database server and using > > ODBC. Of course, ODBC is likely to introduce its own performance hit. > > > I would love to have a discussion on this topic. > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com