Hi

> Shadow by the OS may be the same as mirroring the disk (or maybe not) I

don't know. It may also be different to system restore(XP) - in fact I think
it is quite different.

Is IS absolutely different. Shadows allow db-transaction-like snapshow views
of folders, System restore backs up special files automatically. Nothing in
common.

> System Restore(XP) actually copies the file when it's accessed and does

this to pre-registered file type (by extension) and that's why it need to
disabled for FB or FB files need their extension changed to avoid it. It's
effect, as we know, is to stall initial connections to a DB while the copy
is done.

Correct. Thats why you should not use .gdb with firebird but .fdb.

> People using WInServer2003 have experienced that same slow connection

effect and we have (assumed?) that shadowing is the cause. Perhaps it is -
maybe it isn't.

This assumption is false. Windows 2003 Server DOES have BOTH, volume shadow
copies AND system restore, which are two distinct features. That effect may
be caused by System Restore on Windows 2003, but has nothing to do with
shadowing.

> Now WinServer2003 Shadow according to the documentation effects shares

only.

No. There are two slightly different types of shadows. (I think they are
both driven by the same engine.) Share Shadows (are they called this way?)
are only available for shares. And they are available remotely. Volume
shadow copies do NOT require shares and are NOT available remotely. They are
used for backups for instance. I am NOT sharing my database files.

> Finally WinServer2003 shadowing has to be compared with FB Server

shadowing.

No. There are two absolutely different intentions: FB Serve shadowing keeps
BOTH files up to date. OS Shadowing (as being a snapshot of folders) has the
sense of stalling a view on a folder and therefor NOT updating this copy any
further. Your remarks about writing changes twice does simply not apply.

Regards,
Steffen