> > If you have forced writes disabled, the I imagine the FB Server would
> > get a bit excited at this point. Could be garbage collection as well.
> > The server will let go when it has done what it needs to do. If you
> > have a well designed application, this will be almost immediately in
> > 99% of cases. You (or someone else) may have also inadvertantly made a
> > second connection from another process.
> >
> > Out of curiousity, is it causing any problem or are you just wondering
> > why it happens?
> >
> > Adam
>
> I suppose I should have said "our" problem. We attempt to drop all
> connections to a specific db so that we can copy that file to a remote
> location. We've found that, even though all of the connections we've
> created to the db are being closed, we still cannot complete the copy.
>
> In debugging, we've forced the application closed ensuring none of our
> processes are still running, but found that the lock still exists on
> the file when trying to copy. We thought this was a bit peculiar and
> were wondering if some other system process could be causing the
> server to not release its lock.
>
> We'll continue debugging our application to see if we can determine if
> the server's busy or has open connections before attempting the copy.
>
> Thanks,
> ~Megan

I might also suggest that you do the RIGHT thing and use a backup mechanism
for this rather than copy. for one thing, current connections will not
obstruct your process.
Alan
PS this does not suggest that you should stop looking for a process which
remains connected to the db/server.