05-18-2011 01:34 AM
I've added quite many new fields into the publisher DB recently and asked the users from remote office (using subscriber DB) to sync to get the new fields. On initial sync after the db changes, they will get the message prompt saying the db needs to be locked for updates which they click Yes.
After the sync is completed, the user tries to sync again. And again he gets the message prompt as follow:
"The main database you are synchronizing with and sending data to needs to transfer database modifications to your remote database. These modifications require that you remote database be locked."
He gets this warining every time he syncs now. During the sync process, his subscriber db is locked until the sync completes. This problem also happens to many users in the remote office.
Why is this happening and how do i resolve this?
05-18-2011 05:25 PM
05-18-2011 05:33 PM
I've added many fields only once in the publisher DB. by right, all these new fields should have been added into the subscriber DB after the first sync. I can see the new fields aready in the subscriber DB.
The users said that they've sync more than 30 times and yet they still get this database lock message prompt. i think this is abnormal.
05-19-2011 07:50 AM
This is normal, though I do not know the reason why other than when changing the schema it locks their soon to be syncing database (to be expected, the locking during this time). From what my 50+ remote users say the RDBs sync just fine with no interruptions (power interruptions, internet down, ect) during that process but it just remains locked after.
I would estimate that 5-10% of my databases have this problem when I push out schema changes.
05-19-2011 07:59 AM
my users have confirmed to me that the database lock message prompt is gone now. what i also realize is that the users that is situated in the same office where the ACT! publisher DB is dont have this error, while the users in other remote offices have such errors.
not sure whether this is v2011 "feature" or other reason. i've been using ACT! from v6 until now, and i think only this version has such behaviour.