[GNC] Using Gnucash to access file over flaky network

[Geoff]

Hi Chris

You originally said:

 > For reasons that are complicated but not especially interesting, I
 > would like to run Gnucash on one machine, with the data file located
 > on a remote machine — with the added challenge that the network access
 > available to the Gnucash "client" machine is a terrible cellular data
 > connection that sometimes drops without warning.

Depending on the speed / latency of your connection, another alternative 
for you to consider is "remote access" software on the "client" to 
access GnuCash on the "remote server".

Solutions, depending on you operating system(s), include:
* Windows Remote Desktop
* VNC - Viewer & Server
https://www.realvnc.com/en/connect/pricing/
https://www.tecmint.com/best-remote-linux-desktop-sharing-software/

Regards

Geoff
=====


On 27/11/2021 1:30 am, Chris Mitchell wrote:
> Thanks to all for your insights!
> 
> Now that the general hesitance about the remote-SQLite setup has been
> specifically substantiated, I guess I'll have to decide between braving
> the "less tested" Postgres server backend or just go with the scripted
> lock-and-copy approach.
> 
> I have for a while now been kind of wanting to learn some database
> admin basics, so I'll probably take this excuse to do that, and if I
> trash my Gnucash data while learning, I'll have nobody to blame but
> myself. (Step 1: learn how to correctly back up and restore a Posgres
> DB...)
> 
> As an added bonus, that would get me poised and ready to try out
> concurrent multi-user access some day down the road when it gets
> implemented.  ;-)
> 
> Cheers!
>   -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>