Sync Server - I don't get it

[Martin]

Hi

I feel like I'm being stupid, but I don't get this new 'sync server' in v9.

v8 didn't have it and that was OK.

v9 on the other hand has this sync server which runs on a single PC. If that PC isn't on no one can log in. So are you supposed to install Actinic onto a PC which is always on?

Martin

[leehack]

That would be the general idea yes, much like a light, when it is needed you switch it on. If you need to multiuser into the main system then it will need to be switched on, just like a gotomypc type setup.

One thing i would say is if the multiuser is logging into actinic but the main system is not on, can they not work directly on the main system instead? Is it power consumption or security that concerns you about the main system being on permanently?

[Martin]

Hi

I have a domain running on Windows 2003 SBS.

When I went multiuser with v8 I was told not to install Actinic on the server as that would be a waste of a license. Anyway, no one can work in the server room anyway, it's just full of computers!

Therefore all the server did for Actinic was host the sites directories.

Now with version 9, where does the sync server sit? It should be on my server as that is always on. It isn't suitable to have it on a workstation because everyone isn't in all the time.

Is this really how it works?

Would an order processor therefore have to log on as an Administrator and switch the sync server to their workstation?

Martin

[george]

The main pc that has Actinic on it will have to be switched on when other users want to use it. Its not unusual to leave `the Actinic pc` on 24/7 for this reason. Perhaps not very carbon footprint friendly of course but no harm I suppose in whoever is in first in the morning switching it on, and who is last away at night switching it off.

[Martin]

This doesn't seem well thought out to me!

It would therefore make sense to install onto the server. I will be asking Actinic for a license key for my server.

If they want to charge me for the privilege, they will not be getting any more renewals at all from us!

This upgrade has seriously p###ed me off. After a whole week of downtime I now find this!

[leehack]

Mu is a per user license isn't it, as you are not adding an extra user, just changing the location of the site, would you need to do that? Is Actinic on your server and Multi-users connecting into that server what you are after?

[Martin]

The actual sites are on the server already, the workstations are mapped to that shared drive. This is ideal for my daily automated backup which runs every night.

It seems to me that I'd need to install a copy of Actinic onto the Server for this Sync Server to be operational. I am not sure whether it would work as an evaluation, and what would happen when that runs out.

I would have thought the Actinic brains would have switched to providing a single license which provides n many users when they implemented this, such as Sage and every other piece of software I can think of.

[leehack]

I could not say for sure, but can assure you that actinic have many many site owners who have actinic installed on more than one system (all single license people), so that they can work from various places at various times of the day. The main software license is a per site license as I understand, so i don't see you are doing anything wrong or anythign that would not work. Having said that MU has been a bit of a nightmare area with a few issues still around, so you may need to just roll the dice and find out.

[george]

The likes of Actinet, Gotomypc and Logmein changes the goalposts for many multi-users anyway.

[Martin]

Good simple answer to this as advised by support is to install Actinic onto my server now.

Use my primary license key, but once installed never use that Actinic. That will be OK when using the same license key on my main workstation.

[leehack]

Use my primary license key, but once installed never use that Actinic. That will be OK when using the same license key on my main workstation.

[mash]

Hi guys,

I had come to similar conclusion regarding this MU, we have 3 licences (main and two others), currently software is set up on 3 pcs and the database is on the server.

Like Martin this means that the main pc requires to be on if the others are using the Actinic while the server is on away. Our test has caused mixed results, usually leading to slow software or crashing.

My initial contact with support in December was poor as they weren't really understanding what was happening and drove me a little mad. I concentrated on getting the site upgraded than thought I would have the energy to tackle this other issue.

Also the tracer file, in the help information, it says that the size is in MB but I think it is in KB, found this out from doing a test and and ending up with a tracer file too small be of use.

I felt that there should be a restricted licence for a server version, you could generate snapshots, install snapshots, possible managed users, back up and change settings, even upload, available free for anybody running MU on a server.

Martin have you installed the main licence on the server? Has this worked?

Thanks M

[chris ashdown]

Do you really need the whole actinic on the server, When I tried last year we just placed the site folder on a seperate network drive and that seemed to work ok, if the master computer was not on I seem to remember sinc asked if you wanted to use a local sinc (i.e. on the computer you were using)

[mash]

I don't mind where it is as long as it is reliable, will get the site folder set up on a separate network drive (hopefully).

If the main PC is not available and a local sync is used, what happens if additional users log on and / or the main pc is started, would there be a conflict?

Thanks for the reply

PS - snapshots using MU taking 15 minutes any way of speeding this up, on the test PC here is a lot faster, office pc indicates a network issue?

[chris ashdown]

I seem to remember they all used the same sinc, but not to shure as we moved back to having a master computer with the files when we had another problem and never got around to going back onto networked drive probably with 9.0.2 or early 9.0.3