Chinese - Simplified   Dutch   English - United States   French   German   Portuguese - Iberian   Spanish  


Usenet Posting #7 - Trigeminal Software, Inc. (English)

Subject: INFO: About indirect dropbox paths....
(Originally posted 5/15/99)
Here is something I would love to see added to the Replication FAQ as it does not seem to be documented *anywhere* that I have found. Working on that.... :-)

When setting up a dropbox for indirect synchronization, either in Replication Manager or the TSI Synchronizer, you are not restricted to only selecting values in

format; both will allow you to set


formats and the like. There are no docs that say you cannot, and it is perfectly natural and reasonable to want things this way so that if you want to follow the advice of many people and keep all dropboxes (the server's and each client's) on the server, you do not have to have a zillion shares.


It would seem that some parts of Jet's code have no problems with this setup, and thus when you try to do the indirect synchronization you will see some message files, and the synch status will be "in progress." HOWEVER, that is as far as it will ever get; other parts of the Jet Synchronizer and replication code cannot handle the syntax and the synch will never complete. You will see the "orphaned" msg files in the dropbox; they will never be picked up.

You must limit yourself to

without any additional path information, and each Synchronizer must have its own unique share for its dropbox.

For people using NT for their server who do not want a ton of shares defined, the best thing to do is to create shares for dropboxes with the

setup, as the $ makes the share invisible to most users but totally available to anyone who wants it. This will keep things uncluttered if there are many shares and work around the issue.

FUTURE VERSIONS of the TSI Synchronizer will be designed to give a runtime error if you specify such a path for your indirect dropbox when setting the Synchronizer::IndirectDropbox property. Hopefully this will help some people. If the FAQ can pick up this info as well, and maybe the MS knowledge base, perhaps more people will see it (perhaps there is a KB article but I could not find it).

Maybe the bug might even be fixed some day? :-)

Back to Usenet Musings

Problems with this site? Please contact the
with your comments, questions, or suggestions.