Multiple users accessing document on network share

In our small office we have a couple of numbers douments that are regulary accessed and updated by 3 different people on three different machines, the numbers documents they access are stored on a network share on the Mac Server in the office.
The problem we have is that all three able to open a file at the same time, obviously this is causing all sorts of isues. People losing data they have put into the file and also causes issues with someone being unable to save the file while someone else has it open.
Surely there must be some sort of feature that when one person has the file open, its is locked for editing to everybody else that attempts to access it, I have searched around but cant seem to find anything to solve the problem. Anybody here have any suggestions?
Thanks
Craig

Once a document is all set up, and then you are just making relatively minor edits, then you might find it useful to "share" it on iCloud and have everyone access it and edit it via Numbers on icloud.com rather than Numbers on the Mac. That way you can all work on it at the same time without losing changes.
SG

Similar Messages

Multiple Users Mounting the Same Network Share?

Hello, first time posting...
I'll cut right to my main question: Is it possible, on OS X v10.3.9, for multiple users to simultaneously connect to the same network share?
Here in my office, we have a single Mac that is used by multiple people throughout the day. It has two accounts on it, 'Communications' and 'Studio'. 'Communications' is an Admin account that is used by a co-worker who spends the most time on the Mac. He created the no-limitation 'Studio' account for the rest of us to use.
There is a certain Windows network share that we both frequently use. We've found that if one user connects to the share first, the other user will not have access to it; using 'Go -> Connect to Server' will result in the share being greyed out in the list, and the share will not show up in the Finder.
However, there is one way around it. If Studio connects to the share first and then Communications (the admin account) attempts to make a connection of it's own *through a shortcut on the dock*, then a 'clone' of the share will be created on Comm's desktop, with a "-1" after the name (though it might be some other number).
This may sound like I've answered my own question, but what I'm looking for is a way for the non-Admin account to access the share after the Admin account already has (so that we don't have to log-in and disconnect Communications everytime Studio needs to manage files on the share).
We have Thursby Software's DAVE installed on the Mac, but I'm not sure how it fits into all this.
Any thoughts, suggestions or advice?
Thanks.

Bizarre. It turned out I could merge them, but only in to the mapped drive - L: - and only by explicitly clicking on the drive icon - if I typed L:\series in to dialog box it converted it back to \\nas\share\series... Not helpful.

ARCA Xtra - multiple user access to SQLite DB

Hi Guys,
I have having trouble with multiple users accessing a SQLite DB file from a projector. They can all open and browse the data through the projector fine, but if USER1 makes a change and clicks save, and then USER2 tries access the DB it causes USER2 to get a script error.
Is it possible to write a script which tells the user that the DB is being modified so please wait, rather than throwing them out of the projector with a script error
Thankyou

If you want multiple users to access a database then you would probably be better off using one designed for that purpose like MySQL.
But, if you are set on SQLite and if you can have multiple simultaneous connections which you seem to imply you can, then the best solution I can think of is to create a Class/Script that handles all the details of polling the database for availability and handles other issues like a progress dialogue box.
You have to treat the database as an asynchronous action - meaning you send it a query and at some latter time it sends a result back via a callback. Doing it this way greatly simplifies any database queries you want to make. As long as your queries are fairly simple like SELECT, INSERT, DELETE, etc. then the code is fairly straight forward.
Off the top of my head I wrote something to get you started. I have not tested this code but it does compile. The following is a Parent script that you would use to interface to your database in an asynchronous manner.
-- Asynchronus SQLite
property pDB -- instance of Arca xtra
property pTimeoutTime -- how long in milliseconds to ping database
property pPingTime -- time between database pings.
property RunningQuery -- Boolean. is a query running? true/false
property pTimeOb -- timout object for polling the database
property pCurOperation -- set of data for current query
property pPingCount -- how many times the current query has pinged the database
property pAlertBox -- a MIAW, LDM, or a Sprite that informs the user as to the progress of the query.
on new me
arcaregister([0000,000,0000])
pDB = xtra("arca").new()
Result = pDB.openDB(the moviepath & "ST_data")
if Result.errorMsg then
    alert("Error Opening Database" & return & pDB.explainError(Result.errorMsg))
    return void
end if
pTimeoutTime = 10000
pPingTime = 250
RunningQuery = false
pAlertBox = Sprite(1000) -- for example
return me
end new
on cleanup me
pDB.closeDB()
end cleanup
on executeSQL me, Query, CallbackOb, CallbackMethod, OptionalParameters
if RunningQuery then exit -- only allow one query at a time
RunningQuery = True
pCurOperation = [#Query:Query, #OptionalParameters:OptionalParameters, #CallbackOb:CallbackOb, #CallbackMethod:CallbackMethod]
pPingCount = 0
pTimeOb = timeout().new("QueryProcessor_"&me, 1, me, #processQuery) -- creating the timeout object here breaks the call stack, which is good.
end executeSQL
on processQuery me, TimeOb
Result = pDB.executeSQL(pCurOperation.Query, pCurOperation.OptionalParameters)
if Result.errorMsg then
    if Result.errorMsg = 5 then -- database is currently locked
      pPingCount = pPingCount + 1
      if pPingCount = 1 then -- then inform user there will be a delay.
        pAlertBox.setMessage("Waiting for database response.")
        pAlertBox.setProgress(0)
        pAlertBox.show()
        pTimeOb.period = pPingTime
        exit
      end if
      pAlertBox.setProgress((pPingCount * pPingTime / pTimeoutTime) * 100 )
      if pPingCount * pPingTime = pTimeoutTime then -- timed out
        alert("Query Timed out.")
      else
        exit -- try again in pPingTime time.
      end if
    else -- there is some sort of database error
      alert("Database Error: " & return & pDB.explainError(Result.errorMsg))
    end if
else -- no query errors
    call(pCurOperation.CallbackMethod, pCurOperation.CallbackOb, Result)
end if
-- if the code makes it this far then we are done and need to clean things up
if pTimeOb. objectP then
    pTimeOb.forget()
    pTimeOb = void
end if
pAlertBox.hide()
RunningQuery = false
end processQuery
on setTimeOutTime me, MilliSecs
pTimeoutTime = MilliSecs
end setTimeOutTime
on setPingTime me, MilliSecs
pPingTime = MilliSecs
end setPingTime
You then create an instance of this script on preparemovie.
-- Movie script
global gDB
on prepareMovie
gDB = script("Asynchronus SQLite").new()
if gDB.voidP then halt -- can not connect to the database
end
on stopMovie
gDB.cleanup()
end
Then it is simply a matter of sending your queries to the gDB object and it will send the results back to the callback handler and object that you specify. Here's a behavior that shows how simple this should be:
-- Sample DB Behavior
global gDB
on mouseUp me
Query = "select * from users"
gDB.executeSQL(Query, me, #setQueryResult) -- string, callback object, callback handler name
end
on setQueryResult me, Result -- this is the callback handler/method
put Result
end
I also suggest using a MIAW or a LDM or a set of sprites as a way to inform the user of any delays in processing a query. Check the code for pAlertBox to see how I use this idea to update a progress bar. Of course you will have to create the implementation.

Multiple User access in ATP

I am designing custom ATP for our client. Actually, this logic accesses batch classification data and the calculation logic also differs.
The concern that I have is if one user (say A) creates a sales order item and runs a successful Availability check and goes on to create second sales order item. simultaneously if another user (say B) comes to create new sales order item for same material. now the ATP quantity that second user gets should be less than the quantity confirmed by user A. But both the sales order have not been saved. so how do I block the quantities confirmed by A but yet not saved.
Is there any special method for multiple user access at runtime.

Thanks for ur reply. it was really helpful to gain more insights in my issue.
1. For performance-related reasons, the only time when it makes sense to set the material block with quantity transfer is when it is common for several users to work on the same material simultaneously. And in VA01 there are many parallel Sales order creation
2.You create a sales order for a material. During the availability check, this material is blocked. After the availability check is completed, the block is removed. The quantity reserved for this transaction is recorded in the blocking table. This information can be assessed by all others who are working with this material. If you save the order, the blocked entries are cancelled. this how Material block with quantity transfer in SD works.
The concern that I have now is how to get Blocking Tables for transaction VA01.

Read only / save problem when multiple user accessing PDF

When accessing a PDF-file from a network location (where multiple users might have the file open simultaneously) I have noticed a problem.
First of all you will not get notified when opening the file that it is open elsewhere, there is no "read only" mode in this case.
Secondly (and worse) is the fact that the person having opened the file first is prompted to save it under a new name when she/he is saving changes since "file is open elsewhere".
This works quite the opposite of what most Windows applications do.
Is it a problem in version 7 and 8 of Acrobat only?
I have heard from the support previously that it might be unsupported functionality to use network drives for editing. Is that true?
If you are doing updates after a review but want to share the outcomes of the review this quite annoying...

I agree, and I have seen the same points as well, but...
During the update process after the review many reviewers are looking at their comments and how they were handled during the review meeting and at the same time the authors (yes, for documents such as a requirement specification there will be more than one author) are doing the updates to the original document.
We are also updating the PDF with the changes made by adding new replies to the comments and also changing the status of the comments once more.
The logical approach when opening a file is not to display a text box, but to add the information in the title bar of the program. That way you do not add an extra step to the people who only want "read only" access.

Sharing an iTunes Library across multiple user account and a network.

Sharing an iTunes Music Library across multiple user accounts.
Hello Everybody!
Firstly, this was designed to be run in Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger. It will not work with earlier versions of Mac OS X! Sorry.
Here's a handy tip for keeping your hard drive neat and tidy, it also saves space, what in effect will be done is an iTunes music library will be shared amongst multiple users on the same machine. There are advantages and disadvantages to using this method.
• Firstly I think it might be worthwhile to state the advantages and disadvantages to using this approach.
The advantages include:
- Space will be saved, as no duplicate files will occur.
- The administrator will be able to have complete control over the content of the iTunes library, this may be useful for restricting the content of the Library; particularly for example if computer is being used at and education institution, business or any other sort of institution where things such as explicit content would be less favorable.
- The machine will not be slowed by the fact that every user has lots of files.
The disadvantages to this system include.
- The fact that the account storing the music will have to be logged in, and iTunes will have to be active in that account.
- If the account housing the music is not active then nobody can use the iTunes library.
- There is a certain degree of risk present when an administrator account must be continually active.
- Fast User Switching must be enabled.
Overview:
A central account controls all music on the machine/network, this is achieved by storing iTunes files in a public location as opposed to in the user's directory. In effect the system will give all users across the machine/network access to the same music/files without the possibility of files 'doubling up' because two different users like the same types of music. This approach saves valuable disk space in this regard and may therefore prove to be useful in some situations.
This is a hearty process to undertake, so only follow this tutorial if you're willing to go all the way to the end of it.
Process:
Step 1:
Firstly, we need to organize the host library, I tidied mine up, removing excess playlists, random files, things like that. this will make thing a bit easier in the later stages of this process.
Once the library is tidied up, move the entire "iTunes" folder from your Home directory to the "//localhost" directory (The Macintosh HD) and ensure that files are on the same level as the "Applications", "Users", "Library" and "System" directories; this will ensure that the files in the library are available to all users on the machine (this also works for networks)
Optionally you can set the ownership of the folder to the 'administrator' account (the user who will be hosting the library.), you may also like to set the permissions of 'you can' to "Read & Write" (assuming that you are doing this through the user who will host the library); secondly you should set the "Owner" to the administrator who will be hosting the library and set their "access" to "Read & Write" (this will ensure that the administrator has full access to the folder). The final part of this step involves setting access for the "Others" tab to "Read Only" this will ensure that the other users can view but not modify the contents on the folder.
Overview:
So far we have done the following steps:
1. Organized the host library.
2. Placed the iTunes directory into a 'public' directory so that other users may use it. (this step is essential if you plan on sharing the library across multiple accounts on the same machine. NOTE: this step is only necessary if you are wanting to share you library across multiple accounts on the same machine, if you simply want to share the music across a network, use the iTunes sharing facility.
3. set ownership and permissions for the iTunes music folder.
Step 2:
Currently the administrator is the only user who can use this library, however we will address this soon. In this step we will enable iTunes music sharing in the administrator's account, this will enable other users to access the files in the library.
If you are not logged in as the administrator, do so; secondly, open iTunes and select "Preferences" from the "iTunes" menu, now click the "Sharing" tab, if "share my library on my local network" is not checked, the radio buttons below this will now become active, you may choose to share the entire libraries contents, or share only selected content.
Sharing only selected content may be useful if their is explicit content in the library and minors use the network or machine that the library is connected to.
If you have selected "share entire library" go to Step 3, if you have selected share "share selected playlists" read on.
After clicking "share selected playlists" you must then select the playlists that you intend to share across your accounts and network. Once you have finished selecting the playlists, click "OK" to save the settings.
Overview:
In this step we:
1. Enabled iTunes sharing in the administrator's account, now, users on the local network may access the iTunes library, however, users on the same machine may not.
Step 3:
Now we will enable users on the same machine to access the library on the machine. This is achieved by logging in as each user, opening iTunes, opening iTunes preferences, and clicking "look for shared music". now all users on the machine may also access the library that the administrator controls.
This in effect will mean that the user will not need to use their user library, it will be provided to them via a pseudo network connection.
As a secondary measure, I have chosen to write a generic login script that will move any content from the user's "Music/iTunes/iTunes Music" directory to the trash and then empties the user's trash.
This is done through the use of an Automator Application: this application does the following actions.
1. Uses the "Finder" action "Get Specified Finder Items"
1a. The user's "~/Music/iTunes/iTunes Music" folder
2. Uses the "Finder" action "Get Folder Contents"
3. Uses the "Finder" action "Move to Trash"
4. Uses the "Automator" action "Run AppleScript"
4a. with the following:
on run {input, parameters}
tell application "Finder"
empty trash
end tell
return input
end run
IMPORTANT: Once the script is adapted to the user account it must be set as a login item. in order to keep the script out of the way i have placed it in the user's "Library" directory, in "Application Support" under "iTunes".
Overview:
Here we:
1. Enabled iTunes sharing in the user accounts on the host machine, in effect allowing all users of the machine to view a single iTunes library.
2. (Optional) I have created a login application that will remove any content that has been added to user iTunes libraries, this in effect stops other users of the machine from adding music and files to iTunes.
Step 4:
If it is not already enabled, open system preferences and enable Fast User Switching in Accounts Options.
Summary:
We have shared a single iTunes library across multiple user account, while still allowing for network sharing. This method is designed to save space on machines, particularly those with smaller hard drives.
I hope that this hint proves to be helpful and I hope everybody will give me feedback on my process.
regards,
Pete.
iBook G4; 60GB Hard Drive, 512MB RAM, Airport Extreme Mac OS X (10.4.6) iWork & iLife '06, Adobe CS2, Final Cut Pro. Anything and Everything!!!

how to share music between different accounts on a single computer

What happens when multiple users access the same servlet?

Do the users share all the same resources? Or is a new process generated for each user? I have a servlet that builds a string to return to the user and I only have myself to test, so I can't really see what happens when many users access the servlet. Is there a possibility that the string will get screwed up, like when dealing with multiple threads, or do all the users get their own resources and I don't have to worry about that?

huh? if you can point a test servlet at it, you can point a browser at it (even if the servlet does not serve html it will run)
try pasting the servlet URL into a web browser
refreshing multiple browsers repeatedly could provide a manual test

Can't open Office documents from network share

Dear,
I have a user named X that can't open Office documents from two specific shares. We call this shares T and U.
When the user X opens Office documents the error message is "...xlsx can't be opened". The problem is not client specific because when I login on the same client I can open the documents without any problem. If you copy the file to your desktop it
opens fine.
Any idea?

Anybody?
We have a problem with a customer that they can't open Office documents(Word,Excel etc.) on Windows 8 image on a network share. The error message is just that they can't open the document. The documents are on a sharepoint site and we can open the documents
within the site and also we can open the Office documents on a Windows 7 image.
I think there is a group policy for Windows 8 for this but I don't know for sure?
Anybody?

User file usage on network shares

I need to create a PowerShell script where I can show how much storage space users are using. This would be for users on multiple network shares, above a certain amount (5 GB for example) and then exported to a CSV. Is
it possible to show the first level of subfolders and their totals?
Our Helpdesk does not have the permissions to see the folders on the shares but I do (Domain Admin). I will run the script every so often and email the CSV to them so they can contact the users.
Thanks!
J

Hi,
Yes, that's possible. Here's some starting material for you:
http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2012/05/25/getting-directory-sizes-in-powershell.aspx
http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2013/08/03/weekend-scripter-use-powershell-to-get-folder-sizes.aspx
Let us know if you have any specific questions.
Don't retire TechNet! -
(Don't give up yet - 13,225+ strong and growing)

Multiple users accessing the same data in a global temp table

I have a global temp table (GTT) defined with 'on commit preserve rows'. This table is accessed via a web page using ASP.NET. The application was designed so that every one that accessed the web page could only see their data in the GTT.
We have just realized that the GTT doesn't appear to be empty as new web users use the application. I believe it has something to do with how ASP is connecting to the database. I only see one entry in the V$SESSION view even when multiple users are using the web page. I believe this single V$SESSION entry is causing only one GTT to be available at a time. Each user is inserting into / selecting out of the same GTT and their results are wrong.
I'm the back end Oracle developer at this place and I'm having difficulty translating this issue to the front end ASP team. When this web page is accessed, I need it to start a new session, not reuse an existing session. I want to keep the same connection, but just start a new session... Now I'm losing it.. Like I said, I'm the back end guy and all this web/connection/pooling front end stuff is magic to me.
The GTT isn't going to work unless we get new sessions. How do we do this?
Thanks!

DGS wrote:
I have a global temp table (GTT) defined with 'on commit preserve rows'. This table is accessed via a web page using ASP.NET. The application was designed so that every one that accessed the web page could only see their data in the GTT.
We have just realized that the GTT doesn't appear to be empty as new web users use the application. I believe it has something to do with how ASP is connecting to the database. I only see one entry in the V$SESSION view even when multiple users are using the web page. I believe this single V$SESSION entry is causing only one GTT to be available at a time. Each user is inserting into / selecting out of the same GTT and their results are wrong.
I'm the back end Oracle developer at this place and I'm having difficulty translating this issue to the front end ASP team. When this web page is accessed, I need it to start a new session, not reuse an existing session. I want to keep the same connection, but just start a new session... Now I'm losing it.. Like I said, I'm the back end guy and all this web/connection/pooling front end stuff is magic to me.
The GTT isn't going to work unless we get new sessions. How do we do this?
Thanks!You may want to try changing your GTT to 'ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS' and have the .Net app use a transaction object.
We had a similar problem and I found help in the following thread:
Re: Global temp table problem w/ODP?
All the best.

Multiple users accessing entity bean with same PK

Hi,
Some body please clarify the below issue.
(EJB 1.1, WAS3.5)
I have two app servers and two clones each clone is running in each app server.
Stateful session bean access Entity beans to update/read record in the database.
According to my requirement multiple users can access the same entity data (same primary key). Suppose user A created a Stateful session bean SB1 and the SB1 created Entity1 with PK1, this is happening at clone1.
User B accessed the site and the request went to Clone2 and a new SB2 created, but the SB2 need to access the database with Same PK1.
For the above situation, I guess container can not create a new Entity bean with PK1 because EB with PK1 is already there and it tries to allocate same EB1 with SB2, so if two requests are concurrent do the SB2 wait to get the handle of the EB1?
Is there any way to create two Entity beans with same Primary Key at the same time but in different clone?
Thanks,
Sagar

Hi,
The concurrency level has to be set at the level of database and the database will take care of consistency & integrity of the data. So specity the concurrency level on the database connection in each appserver.

Multiple users accessing same events

Good Afternoon, i wondered if anyone could assist me. I have described what is going on and have a few questins which i have added in bold.
We are a school in the UK running three Apple suites with a mixture of iMacs and macbooks.
The scenario: We have local users accessing some video footage to create a trailer and i would like to find the best method for this.
The Problem: We opted to use local users rather than network users as i believe imported video events are stored locally. Is this correct?
Based on the previous problem i have created two users, User1 & User2. If User1 imports the event then User2 cant see this and would like to work on the same event, then they have to import the event again. Is there anyway that User1 & User 2 could access the same event without doubling it up?
The problem does change slightly that if i use a networked user, and run iMovie then they can see the events on the local hdd. This only happens on certain machines. Any ideas why this would happen?
If anyone can help in anyway it would be much appreciated.
Thanks

The Problem: We opted to use local users rather than network users as i believe imported video events are stored locally. Is this correct?
Yes, the are stored locally, I don't know if Network users do anything more than authenticate over the network then use the local hard drive anyway. That depends on whether or not your users are setup with Network Home drives or are Mobile users that use the local hard drive instead. You might be able to find out from your SysAdmins whether or not Home folders are on a central server of some kind.
Network users authenticate and have a network home drives.
Is there anyway that User1 & User 2 could access the same event without doubling it up?
It seems like there would be a benefit to using an external Mac HD in this case as the permissions on that folder could easily be ignored. Then any user on that Mac will be able to see the iMovie Projects and Events saved onto that external HD and use them without doubling up the Events folder material. Unfortunately I don't think you can force iMovie to use a different folder for the Movies folder on an internal Hard drive. So an external HD might provide an easy workaround if that's possible. And better yet, it makes it all portable BETWEEN Macs if you need to setup on a different machine for some reason.
Thanks, thats was what i wanted to know. Although I dont think the department will be too keep on buying a minimum of 30 external hdd.
This only happens on certain machines. Any ideas why this would happen?
I don't want to blame this on how the machines are configured, but it may be the network users are seeing a Network Home folder in some cases when they are logged in, and in other cases they are seeing the local home folder on the internal Mac HD. I'm just guessing at this point. But it should be consistent across all the machines depending on if the network users is a Network Home user or a Mobile user.
I have double checked and all users are seeing their network home and no local version.
I just wondered if myabe an older version of iMovie(09) allowed the users to see all events even as local users or network. - bizarre really

Why does the Error: 500 SC_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR appear when multiple users access my JSPs but does not occur when only one user accesses my JSPs?

When multiple users run my JSP application, why do some users get an Error: 500 SC_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR for certain JSP pages with the error message No such file or directory. The JSP listed on the Error 500 page varies and is not always the same. When only one user runs my JSP application, the problem does not occur?
The database connection is held when the user logs in or accesses certain parts of the JSP and then is immediately released. No connections to the database are held.
We are using Solaris 8 with MU_6 plus recommended patches.
Enterprise Ultra 250
iAS 6 SP 3

Is anything showing up in the KXS or KJS logs?
It sounds like you might having some kind of thread safety issue with your code. Either that or your guess about running out of database connections.

Link to document on network share

Hello,
SCSM has knowledge articles, and we can attach it to service request as a link on the portal, can we place link to the document which is located on the network share?

AFAIK the "external content" part of a knowledge article does not work as one would expect. An easy but not so pretty workaround is to simply paste the link to the network share into the knowledge article.
http://codebeaver.blogspot.dk/

Multiple users accessing single application in HTML DB 2.1 with XE

Hi,
I am struggling to setup an application in HTMLDB 2.1 on XE.
I would like multiple users to be able to access the same application. I have created the application and the users but now I need to give the new users access to the application.
Can some highlight how to do this? Is it with authorisation schemes?
Thanks
Joel.

Joel,
Have you reviewed the XE documentation on Managing End Users?
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B25329_01/doc/appdev.102/b25309/wrkspc.htm#CHDDFDCH
Sergio

Multiple users accessing document on network share

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for