> No, I understood that this is what you were proposing. But this process > will only be useful if there are actually files saved in a share named > backup on some of the online clients. Those files will only get there if > someone or something puts them there. Could not that someone or something > just save directly to \\server\backup instead of doing that locally? We have several applications in our office that don't perform well over the network for several reasons and many of my people are lazy. I don't know how many times joe blow lost a days work because he forgot save it to the network. What I've done is confined them to working in a directory on their local machines called projects, which I can setup as a client machine share named backup...
> I'd rather put mission critical data on the server, and have no mission > critical data on the client machines. But I understand that your needs > might be different. Nearly impossible in my shop. One of our primary apps, ESRI Arc/Info, has all kinds of trouble when working over the network. The ESRI tech people tell us to work locally, then move the workspace(s) back to the server when we are done. Also, try running a stream simulation model on a 2GB dataset over the network. Even if the user gets the full 100mb/s, it's not much faster than running on a PII400. Those AMD 900s and 1000s are just going to waste. In a perfect world, I'd agree with you Charlie. In a practical world, I have to make sure we aren't wasting hours redoing work because it got lost on someones computer. Regards, Greg J. Zartman -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
