To All:

I have looked up the MSFT Knowledge base articles for Configuring Opportunistic Locking in Windows 2000. The following are the numbers of these articles:
Q296264 for WIN2000
and
Q129202 for WIN NT 4.0

To Kim Haggart in particular,

Did you find that FPW 2.6 on WIN2000 servers opened files much slower (10 seconds to open and set all files in VFP 1.25 mintues in fpw 2.6) than VFP 6.0 >? I thought it might have something to do with Opportunistic Locking but after disabling the locking no change in the opening rate occured.

We do have Norton Enterprise server located throughout the network and have excluded both the DBF, CDX and FPT files and the entire directory storing the database tables.

The code for this product is being ported to VFP 7.0 and SQL but I was wondering if you had a solutions or had experienced a similar issue.

Regards,

Jim Smith

>Hi,
>Here are a couple things you might want to look at:
>
>I assume that the application is Foxpro for Windows 2.6. (Microsoft does not recommend running Foxpro DOS applications on Terminal Servers because they tend to be processor intensive.) Check to see if other applications are running in the same session on the Terminal Server.
>
>Is Disk Caching turned off on the network drive(s) where the data resides? We have found that Foxpro and VFP applications need disk caching turned off to prevent data problems, including read errors.
>
>How much RAM do you have on the Terminal Server? The more users, the more RAM needed on the Server. I do not recall what is needed per user. If users have been added over the last year or so, and the hardware has not updated to handle the increased load, that may be a factor.
>
>Can you give more details as to NOS (Novell ?.? w/3rd party TS, NT4.0 w/3rd party TS or W2K w/W2K TS), Hardware, etc.?
>
>I hope this helps. If you can supply more info, other possible sources may come to light.
>
>Regards,
>Kim Haggart
>Strategic Information Systems,
>San Bernardino, CA