Wayne,

Maybe my question is not relevant (and if so I apologize). But I was wondering, in order to support the Terminal Servers, as you describe, what kind of internet connection you have? DSL? T1, T3?

Thank you.

>We have one client running a Terminal Server with about 30-40 users - it is a nice dual processor Dell server with 4gb RAM. They have local users and a remote office all running on the terminal. This client runs everything on terminal - so Office, email, etc is all running on this box. There is a combination of dumb terminals and PCs connecting. This client uses a Cisco VPN solution - though that is just for added security. The application we wrote is vfp9/codemine connecting to sql server. The sql box is a single processor with 2gb RAM.
>
>Another client has a lot of very nice hardware and runs a virtual server connected to their san. I think the virtual server is set up to have 4gb RAM as well. This is a vfp9 application connecting to sql server - the sql box is a virtual server as well connected to their san. This client only runs our app on this box - all email, etc is local on their pc. They recently moved to a new facility and updated all their hardware - so they might have 2 terminal boxes... I am not sure. I do know that there are at the peak about 100 users on this application.
>
>We have another one that uses terminal server and citrix - they have numerous applications - from vfp9 to fpdos. They also run imaging software, etc. I don't know the exact setup they use for production. Probably 50 remote users - all local users are setup to run from their local pc.
>
>It depends on your app design as to what your hardware needs may be... in all our deployments over the last several years, we have used sql as the database - so the requirements on the local server have come down a little. I would suggest you run some tests and see what your application uses per user. I am going to wild guess that the spec for the first client I described above will suffice... but unless I see your app, I can't really give you exact requirements. A rule of thumb I have always used is to have at least 100mb RAM per user. And to get at least 2 processors with the ability to have at least 4. Then if you have to add, you can. While vfp will not take advantage of the multiple processors, the OS will.
>
>
>>Wayne, thank you for the info. What product are you using? What sort of backend infrastruture is required per, say, 50 users?
>>
>>
>>>We have several implementations... works very well.
>>>
>>>We use a launcher program and copy everything to a local area based on the user that is logged in. The launcher checks the master copy of the program that is stored in a directory and refreshes the local version whenever it is run. All users have an icon to the launcher on their desktop when they login.
>>>
>>>Essentially;
>>>
>>>C:\APPNAME\Master_Dir\app_launcher.exe
>>>C:\APPNAME\Master_Dir\app_exe.exe
>>>C:\APPNAME\Master_Dir\"other files and dirs"
>>>
>>>
>>>C:\APPNAME\Run_Dir\[user_name]
>>>Files and folders are copied from Master_Dir to Run_Dir\[user_name]
>>>
>>>Then the launcher.exe executes the local exe Run_Dir\[user_name]\app_exe.exe and quits.
>>>
>>>The launcher sets the temporary workspace and other settings in a config.fpw file as well and copies it local.
>>>
>>>We also have some that have a shared server - and the Master_Dir is on another server - nothing really changes other than the drive or UNC path to the master files.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi All,
>>>>
>>>>Can anyone share insights and ideas about running a VFP application on a single server and allowing multiple people to run it, each in their own space i.e. so it does not interfere with other running instances.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks