View Single Post
  #3  
Old 08-13-2007, 07:19 AM
Jon Polish Jon Polish is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-21-2006
Posts: 391
Re: very disappointed with synchronization

Quote:
Originally posted by igoldsmid
In my case I wanted to keep a windows file system folder tree, containing a few thousand files and internet shortcuts, and several Outlook Folders each containing more than a thousand items, synchronized. Since these folders are changing several times a day, and synchronizing with UR locks you out of doing anything else with UR until completed - I find the sync process essentially unusable.

To be truly useful, the sync process needs to happen as a background process, and not lock up UR from doing anything else. Ideally, you should be able to set an Option/Preference where UR automatically checks for changes in the synchronized folders, at custom intervals specified by the user, and then the sync happens in the background while the user is getting on with something else (in UR)....
I completely agree, and I find myself in similar circumstances. Kinook's answer is not satisfactory, it is just another workaround. But there may not be a viable solution. If my understanding is correct, the database can not accept further input from any user when it is in the process of writing / updating. The massive synchs you describe will lock you out of UR for VERY long periods. The incremental synchs are good in theory, but in practice, I think that you will end up having UR unexpectedly unavailable. That could be infuriating too.

Jon
Reply With Quote