Which .Dat/.Idx Is eMail?
(PeteCresswell)
and have been plagued by corruptions where Agent just hangs upon
startup.
So far, I've managed to restore from the prior day's backup, but
the day is coming when that won't work and I'll have to go back
more than one day.
Even going back one day, I lose email that I'd rather not lose.
NG's, no big deal... email: big deal.
So, bottom line, which files contain email? In the event of
corruption, then I could try restoring everything except the
email files and hope that does the trick.
--
PeteCresswell
Jaimie Vandenbergh
wrote:
>I've been keeping my Agent files on a Windows Home Server share -
>and have been plagued by corruptions where Agent just hangs upon
>startup.
I'd suggest not doing that. Agent gets pretty unhappy when there's any
problem accessing its files, and corruption is very likely.
I've no idea why Agent is so much more sensitive than other apps, but
it is. Even accessing its files via a local network share (ie on the
local disk, but out through Windows' filesharing mechanism) crashes
and burns.
>So, bottom line, which files contain email? In the event of
>corruption, then I could try restoring everything except the
>email files and hope that does the trick.
Right click your mail folder(s), Folder Properties, Name and Scheme.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to use
the Net, and he won't bother you for weeks." - Phil Proctor
PeteCresswell
wrote:
> I'd suggest not doing that. Agent gets pretty unhappy when there's any
> problem accessing its files, and corruption is very likely.
> >So, bottom line, which files contain email? In the event of
> >corruption, then I could try restoring everything except the
> >email files and hope that does the trick.
>
> Right click your mail folder(s), Folder Properties, Name and Scheme.
I think I'm back in business. Lost a few days of NG postings, but
my mail seems tb intact. Whew!!!!!.....
Yes, definately not going to run Agent against WHS anymore.
I moved Agent's files to C: from where I will run Agent - then WHS
will back them up as it backs up the rest of that PC.
Tangental question: Does running 5.0 do anything to files/parms that
would prevent reverting to 4.x?
Although I seem to have my mail back, I've closed 5.0 once and now
when I have re-opened it Agent seems tb hung with "(Not
Responding)".
Or maybe I need to go back another day or so with my restores?
Christopher A. Lee
<pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 26, 9:58�pm, Jaimie Vandenbergh <jai...@sometimes.sessile.org>
>wrote:
>> I'd suggest not doing that. Agent gets pretty unhappy when there's any
>> problem accessing its files, and corruption is very likely.
>
>> >So, bottom line, which files contain email? �In the event of
>> >corruption, then I could try restoring everything except the
>> >email files and hope that does the trick.
>>
>> Right click your mail folder(s), Folder Properties, Name and Scheme.
>
>I think I'm back in business. Lost a few days of NG postings, but
>my mail seems tb intact. Whew!!!!!.....
>
>Yes, definately not going to run Agent against WHS anymore.
>
>I moved Agent's files to C: from where I will run Agent - then WHS
>will back them up as it backs up the rest of that PC.
Agent does not like a lot of backup products. It's too easy to get the
data and index files out of step.
It certainly doesn't like background backup products because it
thrashes between agent and the backup program, with each locking files
for too long.
And what is backed up is out of step between data and index files
because one got updated while the other was backed out.
I ended up disabling Agent's files in the backup program's
configuration and doing both a regular manual copy and archiving the
email folders to files that get backed up.
Jaimie Vandenbergh
<pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yes, definately not going to run Agent against WHS anymore.
>
>I moved Agent's files to C: from where I will run Agent - then WHS
>will back them up as it backs up the rest of that PC.
Yup. Does WHS do that overnight? As with any database app, if a backup
runs while Agent is working and updating its dat/idx files then the
backup isn't likely to be consistent.
>Tangental question: Does running 5.0 do anything to files/parms that
>would prevent reverting to 4.x?
There were changes but pretty minor. I think it works okay, but if
you'd used any of 5's subfolder arrangement you'll have to rearrange
your folders again.
However, I would suggest sticking with 5, it's no buggier than 4 (ie
not very). Any issues you're currently seeing are likely dodgy data
rather than Agent version related.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
"It should always be a Sunday but, unfortunately, it hardly ever is."
- Jeff Noon, Automated Alice
PeteCresswell
wrote:
> Yup. Does WHS do that overnight? As with any database app, if a backup
> runs while Agent is working and updating its dat/idx files then the
> backup isn't likely to be consistent.
It backs up according to a user-specified schedule - in which I tell
it to do the deed at 0600.
As long as I don't forget and leave Agent running overnight, I should
be covered.
At restore time, WHS will let me specify a backup to do an entire
restore from or let me pick folders/files.
Seems like a marriage made in heaven to me. Only thing missing is
the ability to run Agent from different PCs on the network. I
*could* create a shared dir on the machine hosting Agent, but OTOH,
there's danger there too if/when two instances of Agent start banging
on the same files. Been there, done that.
> However, I would suggest sticking with 5, it's no buggier than 4 (ie
> not very). Any issues you're currently seeing are likely dodgy data
> rather than Agent version related.
Done. I just coughed up the twenty bucks....
Thanks for the reassurance that 5 will not introduce any more issues.
Jaimie Vandenbergh
<pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 28, 8:30�am, Jaimie Vandenbergh <jai...@sometimes.sessile.org>
>wrote:
>> Yup. Does WHS do that overnight? As with any database app, if a backup
>> runs while Agent is working and updating its dat/idx files then the
>> backup isn't likely to be consistent.
>
>It backs up according to a user-specified schedule - in which I tell
>it to do the deed at 0600.
>As long as I don't forget and leave Agent running overnight, I should
>be covered.
Should be fine then too - as long as Agent is quiescent, there'll be
no trouble. If you leave Agent downloading, or if it recieves an email
during the backup, then you may get inconsistencies.
>Seems like a marriage made in heaven to me. Only thing missing is
>the ability to run Agent from different PCs on the network. I
>*could* create a shared dir on the machine hosting Agent, but OTOH,
>there's danger there too if/when two instances of Agent start banging
>on the same files. Been there, done that.
Yep, likewise. There really isn't any way to do it short of putting
Agent on a memory stick and carrying the single instance of the DB
around with you.
>> However, I would suggest sticking with 5, it's no buggier than 4 (ie
>> not very). Any issues you're currently seeing are likely dodgy data
>> rather than Agent version related.
>
>Done. I just coughed up the twenty bucks....
>Thanks for the reassurance that 5 will not introduce any more issues.
Whoops - I was thinking you were already on (paid for) 5 and were
considering reverting to 4. I'd have recommended sticking with 4
unless you wanted some of 5's new features.
I consider 5 a worthwhile upgrade, myself.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
'The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human
mind to correlate all its contents' - H.P.Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"
Mark Lloyd
>
>>Seems like a marriage made in heaven to me. Only thing missing is
>>the ability to run Agent from different PCs on the network. I
>>*could* create a shared dir on the machine hosting Agent, but OTOH,
>>there's danger there too if/when two instances of Agent start banging
>>on the same files. Been there, done that.
>
>Yep, likewise. There really isn't any way to do it short of putting
>Agent on a memory stick and carrying the single instance of the DB
>around with you.
There's another way. Use Agent on one machine and use remote access
software line RealVNC (http://www.realvnc.com/). The free version is
OK if you're on the LAN and don't need encryption.
However, it can be really difficult getting the window right if the 2
machines use different screen resolution.
[snip]
--
58 days until the winter solstice celebration
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us
"How could you ask me to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster
(PeteCresswell)
>There's another way. Use Agent on one machine and use remote access
>software line RealVNC (http://www.realvnc.com/). The free version is
>OK if you're on the LAN and don't need encryption.
>
>However, it can be really difficult getting the window right if the 2
>machines use different screen resolution.
Actually, I'm Remote Desktopping into it from work on a fairly
regular basis. Windows Home Server allows this - even with the
dynamic DNS assignments by my el-cheapo Verizon account.
Hadn't thought about RD'ing locally - good point - and that's
definitely the way to go: no multiple concurrent users possible.
BW: My Agent files seem tb on the mend.
I *think* I've gotten all of my Inbox back.
I started by moving all my .DAT and .IDX files to another folder
and firing up Agent just to confirm it worked.
Then I sorted the files by decreasing size and started adding
them back to Agent's home dir one-by-one - and noting the folder
name and file name of each for future reference.
I've got about half of them in there how - with maybe a
half-dozen needing 5.0's "Repair" operation.
Haven't gotten to the one(s) that make Agent hang yet, but when I
do at least I'll be able to back them out and keep going with the
others.
--
PeteCresswell
Daniel Prince
>There's another way. Use Agent on one machine and use remote access
>software line RealVNC (http://www.realvnc.com/). The free version is
>OK if you're on the LAN and don't need encryption.
Do you know if RealVNC is better than TightVNC?
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!
Mark Lloyd
<neut...@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>Mark Lloyd <mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
>
>>There's another way. Use Agent on one machine and use remote access
>>software line RealVNC (http://www.realvnc.com/). The free version is
>>OK if you're on the LAN and don't need encryption.
>
>Do you know if RealVNC is better than TightVNC?
I don't know about TightVNC, other than that it doesn't support
encryption. I need that since I sometimes use it from a remote
location.
--
56 days until the winter solstice celebration
Daniel Prince
>On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:10:20 -0700, Daniel Prince
><neut...@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>Mark Lloyd <mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>There's another way. Use Agent on one machine and use remote access
>>>software line RealVNC (http://www.realvnc.com/). The free version is
>>>OK if you're on the LAN and don't need encryption.
>>
>>Do you know if RealVNC is better than TightVNC?
>
>I don't know about TightVNC, other than that it doesn't support
>encryption. I need that since I sometimes use it from a remote
>location.
I have been using TightVNC for some time. I find that if frequently
freezes up. (It still works but the screen stops refreshing.) It
also sometimes closes itself with or without an error message. I
think it works an average of less than two hours before I need to
restart it. Does the free version of RealVNC work better than that?
Carroll Robbins
-0800 in <6b65f51mu8bm597l1...@4ax.com>
>I have been using TightVNC for some time. I find that if frequently
>freezes up. (It still works but the screen stops refreshing.) It
>also sometimes closes itself with or without an error message. I
>think it works an average of less than two hours before I need to
>restart it. Does the free version of RealVNC work better than that?
I use TightVNC 1.3dev7 and don't have these problems. I normally run it
24/7 for 25 days before I have to reboot WinXP.
--
Carroll B. Robbins, Jr.
(PeteCresswell)
>I use TightVNC 1.3dev7 and don't have these problems. I normally run it
>24/7 for 25 days before I have to reboot WinXP.
What is the niche that these third-party apps fill that
RemoteDesktop (i.e. mstsc.exe) does not?
--
PeteCresswell
Jaimie Vandenbergh
wrote:
Cross platform usage - RDP is Windows only. RDP is also largely
useless when you've not got at least "pro" level Windows to connect to
(at least for XP, I've no idea about what Vista/7 home versions do).
VNC will work on damn near anything, takes 2 mins to set up, and if
required can be run by a user without needing admin rights.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
Remember, "persistence" is just a euphemism for "serial failure"
-- Tim Dawson
Christopher A. Lee
<jai...@sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:
>On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:46:19 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>Per Carroll Robbins:
>>>I use TightVNC 1.3dev7 and don't have these problems. I normally run it
>>>24/7 for 25 days before I have to reboot WinXP.
>>
>>What is the niche that these third-party apps fill that
>>RemoteDesktop (i.e. mstsc.exe) does not?
>
>Cross platform usage - RDP is Windows only. RDP is also largely
>useless when you've not got at least "pro" level Windows to connect to
>(at least for XP, I've no idea about what Vista/7 home versions do).
>
>VNC will work on damn near anything, takes 2 mins to set up, and if
>required can be run by a user without needing admin rights.
Yes. We used it to talk to Linux servers and even the console of the
plug compatible mainframe we were developing.
Also for telecommuters to access each others' PCs to debug together,
eg for one of us to see code the other highlighted when discussing a
problem.
> Cheers - Jaimie
Daniel Prince
I was using 1.2.9. The web site that I got to with the TightVNC
1.2.9 help file said that 1.2.9 is the latest stable version.
The web site also listed this version:
Development Version, 1.3dev1
Development versions include more features but may be unstable, so
they're not intended for production use. Current development
version, 1.3dev1 (Win32 only at the moment), features partial
desktop sharing allowing to choose a single window or a rectangular
screen area to share.
I found another web site with version 1.3.10 listed as the latest
stable version. I installed it and a Mirage Driver for TightVNC
http://www.demoforge.com/dfmirage.htm. I hope this will solve my
problems. I have already noticed that this new version can start up
full screen which I like.
If only it was possible to use Alt-Tab to switch windows on the
remote computer with TightVNC instead of my having to use the
Trackpoint.