On the more recent MS servers, there is a 'Caching' item in the properties
for a shared folder. Disabling caching will prevent users from making the
contents into 'offline files'
> Kind of scary to realize one little, obscure, unnoticed checkbox can
> mess up so much data.
Yep. IMHO, caching OFF should be the default for new shares, but it isn't.
Like disk encryption this is a dangerous option if activated by an end-user
without understanding the issues it creates.
"njem" wrote:
> I a db with the data on the server and several stations doing data
> entry. We had mysterious instances of missing data. I finally
> discovered one station that had off-line files enabled. It was
> apparently syncing it's local copy with that on the server and,
> depending on which was newer, sometimes the server copy would get
> overwritten, sometimes the local copy would.
>
> 1. What would turn on off-line files? This user couldn't have found
> that setting to save their life, much less have just stumbled on it.
> And they're a very reasonable, reliable person who wouldn't just play
> with settings or fail to mention if, for instance, some pop up
> suggested they turn on some feature unknown to them. Are there
> applications that enable the feature on install? Does Windows enable
> it itself if it thinks it's needed?
>
> 2. This is on a desktop that doesn't seem to have any connection
> problems, and the network and server are always on (except for
> maintenance reboot or such). Even if off-line files is enabled, why
> would the local station ever revert to using local files when the live
> files are available? The way I discovered this was a balloon popped up
> from the task bar telling me off-line files were in use. I immediately
> checked if server files were available, and they were. (I've since
> turned off the feature.)
>
> I could see maybe the off-line feature fetching copies on shutdown or
> on going to sleep, and checking which is most current on start up. But
> if it's doing it right it should see that the server copy is at least
> as current and so always work on that copy. There would never be a
> reason for it to prefer to use the local copy when the server one is
> available. So even if enabled, why would it use it?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
|