Leslie
Fri Aug 08 11:01:28 CDT 2003
Lee,
Thank you so much for your prompt and complete reply.
We are running Norton software, and will check into this.
The temp files on local disks seems a good suggestion. I
noticed on the NT resource controller that the application
opens abount 200 files.
Is there any tool one could use to track application
activity (file opens, closes, writes, etc) through the
network? Then we could determine where the bottlneck is.
Leslie
>-----Original Message-----
>Hi Leslie:
>
>If your code has not changed and only the operating
system of the
>workstations is different, this leads me to believe this
is an issue with
>the OS environment.
>
>1. Disable any anti virus software running on the server
or the
>workstations and test the performance of the application.
We have seen
>problems with some anti virus software programs causing
poor performance in
>VFP. See these articles:
>321550 HOWTO: Optimize Visual FoxPro Applications While
Using Norton
>AntiVirus
>
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321550
>
>304482 PRB: VFP Executable File Is Slow to Access Tables
On Server
>
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=304482
>
>2. Make sure all the Workstations and server machines
have the latest
>service packs installed.
>
>3. Make sure you are directing the VFP temp files to a
local hard drive on
>the workstation using the TMPfiels= command in the
Config.fpw file.
>
>I hope this helps.
>
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>
>Sincerely,
>Microsoft FoxPro Technical Support
>Lee Mitchell
>
>*-- VFP8 HAS ARRIVED!! --*
>Read about all the new features of VFP8 here:
>
http://www.universalthread.com/VisualFoxPro/News/VFP8Releas
e.asp
>Purchase VFP8 here:
>
http://shop.microsoft.com/Referral/Productinfo.asp?
siteID=11518
>
>Keep an eye on the product lifecycle for Visual FoxPro
here:
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?id=fh;
[ln];lifeprodv
> - VFP5 Mainstream Support retires June 30th, 2003
> - VFP6 Mainstream Support retires Sept. 30th, 2003
>
>>Leslie,
>
>Check your win2K machines and eliminate unneccessary
network protocols and
>network places. Your win95 systems may be running netbeui
instead of tcp/ip,
>whilst your win2k systems may have both configured.
>
>HTH
>Jan B
>
>"Leslie Pollak" <lpollak@dpsa.cl> wrote in message
>news:04e401c35d5a$d510be70$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>> I wonder if anyone could help me, I am not a Fox expert,
>> and out of my depth on this one, and wonder if anyone
has
>> any ideas on it, or has run up against anything like
this
>> before….
>>
>> We have an application written in Visual Fox 6.0, which
>> when running from Win 95 or Win 98 clients had a
>> reasonable throughput. Since we have upgraded our
client
>> stations to Windows 200 Professional, our throughput has
>> decreased tremendously.
>>
>> The main databases reside on a Windows NT 4.0 server
>> running Service Pack 6.0.
>>
>> The first time our throughput downgraded was when we
>> installed an ARCServe backup system on one of our
servers,
>> which activates 3 services:
>> - ArcServe Discovery Service
>> - CA Backup Agent for Open Files Service
>> - Client Agent for ARCServe
>> We determined that if we brought down the Open Files
>> Service when not in use, our throughput bettered. So we
>> opted to only bring it up every evening and stop it once
>> backups are through.
>>
>> This does help, but the system’s response time is still
>> very slow on the Windows 2000 Pro stations.
>>
>> As a test we set a 200 client and a Win 95 client side
by
>> side and compared.
>>
>> The Win 95 client responded as usual, with a reasonable
2
>> to 5 seconds per transaction, as it always had.
>>
>> The 2000 client response was random, normal at times (as
>> above), but at others very slow, with 40 to 60 second
>> waits per transaction, or even 30 to 70 seconds just to
>> return to the main menu, at which time it displayed
a “DO
>> CANCELLED” message on the lower left-hand corner.
>>
>> Thank you all for your kind attention,
>>
>> Leslie Pollak
>
>
>
>
>.
>