>>I'm glad you've had good experiences. Can you give me some idea of how heavily "loaded" your Samba servers are - # of users, traffic levels etc.?
>
>I have two sites that required that I gang the Nic's. Those guys are also using the Linux server as a disk storage device. One is running AccountMate (Lan) and the highest user count I saw was 43 on VAM. The other is using software I wrote for inventory tracking. But it's has a very interesting mix of workstations all sharing data via the linux server that include a several Mac's, Lots windows boxes, two other Linux workstations, and lots of PDA's.
>
>The others are mom and pop companies (less than twenty people).
>
>BTW we considered moving the AccountMate (VAM) to other platforms. The Citrix users were having printing issues (we have since fixed it) and we thought Linux might be the cause. We tried Novell but that was beyond terrible - I later found out that DFB's (DBC) required special settings on Novell servers. But our main purpose was to test windows server 2003. I think it was very close. Thinking back I would say the forms opened faster using the windows server and the reports ran faster using the Linux box. Of course we could not really load test and used only five connections.

That's roughly the size of my client that's seeing the issues. They're a high-volume school photographer, and have gone digital over the last couple of years so they push a *lot* of large files around. They've got multiple Samba servers with multi-TB arrays, all their network infrastructure is GB Ethernet (although a lot of their workstations that don't do digital image processing are still only 100Mbit). I'm sure that from time to time they're saturating various segments of their network with traffic, for extended periods of time. Maybe this is having some effect on VFP reliability.