> Thank you for that information. Tell me, what are the home drives about?
> H: is a mapped drive but where is the actual share located? I'm not sure
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
>> >
>> > What other issues are there that I'd likely run into?
Thanks, again very helpful. The network admin is very good but isn't
tuned in to Access db names, so I'm checking out that part.
The db backend will be used by both remote user via TS and local LAN
folks. My first instinct was to put the backend on the TS machine, on
the 2nd hdd, in order to reduce connections to it over the network (less
oppty for corruption). The local users would still of course connect
over the LAN. I think the network admin prefers keeping the backend on
the other win2003 server, the one that hosts exchange and all of that.
Is there any reason NOT to put the db backend on the TS server as far as
your experience goes? Don't expect it'd have any apparent impact on
responsiveness as I think the TS connection will invoke more lag than
the speed of the connection to the backend.
The home directory thing sounds great, I've read about it, and this does
seem to solve some things.
> Yeah, Drive, Directory, Folder depends what era you stated in this business
> So the Home folders would be in a structure sort of like this
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> >> being used by users across the country and works a treat over Terminal
> >> Server. We have never come across Terminal Server issues, ever
kiwibruce - 10 Dec 2004 05:06 GMT
Yes put the BE on the Terminal Server. Keep the LAN traffic down to a
minimum
The response time for the TS users will be better and it is no different for
the LAN users
If the server has the horsepower then put it there and it is good to keep it
away from Exchange as well
Bruce
> Thanks, again very helpful. The network admin is very good but isn't
> tuned in to Access db names, so I'm checking out that part.
[quoted text clipped - 72 lines]
>> >> being used by users across the country and works a treat over Terminal
>> >> Server. We have never come across Terminal Server issues, ever
Robert1105 - 02 May 2005 21:50 GMT
I am curious if you were able to get this to work? We have a similar
situation where we have a TS 2003 Cluster running into a Server 2003
infrastructure. Our Access Database is Access 2000. There is a Tech Note
regarding needing to run the Terminal Services Transform on an Access 2000
database; however, this relates to a Server 2000 environment. I am not able
to find any information on what should be done in a Server 2003 environment.
I am courious abour what you were able to get working?
> Thanks, again very helpful. The network admin is very good but isn't
> tuned in to Access db names, so I'm checking out that part.
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
> > >> being used by users across the country and works a treat over Terminal
> > >> Server. We have never come across Terminal Server issues, ever