FartingUncle
asked on
Access 95 Runtime - Out of Memory error on WinXP
Hi,
I have been running an Access 95 database using the Access 95 Runtime Distributable for many years now, in various locations and various systems, and am currently attempting to get it working on a networked version of Windows XP Professional (SP2). The problem is that whenever I run my shortcut to load the database I get an 'Out of Memory' error (that's all the dialog box says).
I have tried just loading msaccess.exe, and I get the expected response ('can't find database: specify a database in the command line'), and have also tried using a simple database from The Access Web with the same Out of Memory result. Interestingly, if I supply the name of a file that doesn't exist, I also get the same error, which implies that it is not a problem with the mdb file.
I have installed the runtime executable from the same install file onto other machines using Win2K which has been fine, however I initially had problems with NTFS directory permissions. The WinXP system uses Fat32 though, and I can write to the directories in question, so I don't think this is part of the problem.
I have tried using Win98 compatability mode but this hasn't helped.
I know that I should be able to get it to work on WinXP, as I have a similar DB running on another WinXP machine (can't remember which version) using the runtime distributables.
I am on-site with a client so a speedy response would be much appreciated, hence 500 points. :)
I have been running an Access 95 database using the Access 95 Runtime Distributable for many years now, in various locations and various systems, and am currently attempting to get it working on a networked version of Windows XP Professional (SP2). The problem is that whenever I run my shortcut to load the database I get an 'Out of Memory' error (that's all the dialog box says).
I have tried just loading msaccess.exe, and I get the expected response ('can't find database: specify a database in the command line'), and have also tried using a simple database from The Access Web with the same Out of Memory result. Interestingly, if I supply the name of a file that doesn't exist, I also get the same error, which implies that it is not a problem with the mdb file.
I have installed the runtime executable from the same install file onto other machines using Win2K which has been fine, however I initially had problems with NTFS directory permissions. The WinXP system uses Fat32 though, and I can write to the directories in question, so I don't think this is part of the problem.
I have tried using Win98 compatability mode but this hasn't helped.
I know that I should be able to get it to work on WinXP, as I have a similar DB running on another WinXP machine (can't remember which version) using the runtime distributables.
I am on-site with a client so a speedy response would be much appreciated, hence 500 points. :)
Whew ... Access 95 ... brings back horrible memories <g> ... you're probably the only living soul still using 95!! That was about the most unstable release of Access I've ever dealt with!!
Access 95 used Jet 3.0. The XP box will have Jet 4.0 by default; your other XP box may have had an app installed that made use of an earlier version of Jet and therefore isntalled it.
I seem to recall that installing all service packs for Jet 3.0 helped. Not sure where you'd get them, although a search of the MS website will probably turn them up.
I know this doesn't help you now, but it might be time to upgrade to a newer version ... as your clients upgrade to 32 and 64 bit systems, your 95 app will get more and more obselete.
Access 95 used Jet 3.0. The XP box will have Jet 4.0 by default; your other XP box may have had an app installed that made use of an earlier version of Jet and therefore isntalled it.
I seem to recall that installing all service packs for Jet 3.0 helped. Not sure where you'd get them, although a search of the MS website will probably turn them up.
I know this doesn't help you now, but it might be time to upgrade to a newer version ... as your clients upgrade to 32 and 64 bit systems, your 95 app will get more and more obselete.
But maybe that's the problem. Try to demount some ram so you are left with, say, 128 MB.
It could also be caused by a conflict with a printer driver or screen driver. Try setting a simple printer driver like LaserJet II or standar text only as default printer and use standard SVGA resolution.
/gustav
It could also be caused by a conflict with a printer driver or screen driver. Try setting a simple printer driver like LaserJet II or standar text only as default printer and use standard SVGA resolution.
/gustav
ASKER
I know what you mean - it's somewhat anacronistic to still be using acc95 in this day and age, but it's the old time/money issue - they can't afford to upgrade it right now. Maybe one day.
Anyway, I found some updated drivers at http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;151186 - are these the ones you meant? I installed them, but it didn't work.
I will try the other suggestions from cactus data shortly, but need to reboot first. I'll let you know how I get on.
- Mark
Anyway, I found some updated drivers at http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;151186 - are these the ones you meant? I installed them, but it didn't work.
I will try the other suggestions from cactus data shortly, but need to reboot first. I'll let you know how I get on.
- Mark
ASKER
I just checked the application logs, and found the following two events:
Event Type: Information
Event Source: ESENT
Event Category: General
Event ID: 100
Date: 01/04/2005
Time: 14:34:23
User: N/A
Computer: HPD017
Description:
wuauclt (2648) The database engine 5.01.2600.2180 started.
Event Type: Information
Event Source: ESENT
Event Category: General
Event ID: 102
Date: 01/04/2005
Time: 14:34:23
User: N/A
Computer: HPD017
Description:
wuaueng.dll (2648) SUS20ClientDataStore: The database engine started a new instance (0).
Might these have anything to do with the problem? They seem to have occurred at startup, not when I tried to run the DB.
- Mark
Event Type: Information
Event Source: ESENT
Event Category: General
Event ID: 100
Date: 01/04/2005
Time: 14:34:23
User: N/A
Computer: HPD017
Description:
wuauclt (2648) The database engine 5.01.2600.2180 started.
Event Type: Information
Event Source: ESENT
Event Category: General
Event ID: 102
Date: 01/04/2005
Time: 14:34:23
User: N/A
Computer: HPD017
Description:
wuaueng.dll (2648) SUS20ClientDataStore: The database engine started a new instance (0).
Might these have anything to do with the problem? They seem to have occurred at startup, not when I tried to run the DB.
- Mark
ASKER
I've tried making generic/text only the default printer (though I didn't delete the other printers) and lowering the screen resolution (is that what you meant?) but neither helped. I'm not sure how to demount RAM though - how do you do that?
- Mark
- Mark
> I'm not sure how to demount RAM though - how do you do that?
Pull out a ram module or two ...
/gustav
Pull out a ram module or two ...
/gustav
ASKER
hmmm... I'm not really in a position to do that unfortunately.
RE: the drivers ... yes, those would be it ...
wuauclt and wuaueng are libraries used by the Update service: http://www.liutilities.com/products/wintaskspro/processlibrary/wuauclt/
thus I'd assume the db engine they're referring to would be the one housing infomation about updates to the machine.
Do you have any other events that show a db engine starting?
wuauclt and wuaueng are libraries used by the Update service: http://www.liutilities.com/products/wintaskspro/processlibrary/wuauclt/
thus I'd assume the db engine they're referring to would be the one housing infomation about updates to the machine.
Do you have any other events that show a db engine starting?
You could install Virtual PC or similar and install WinNT or -2000 ...
/gustav
/gustav
ASKER
No other events that refer to DBs, and no services that stand out as being problematic. I have tried terminating services too, but with no success.
The Virtual PC idea is a good one, though pretty extreme (and I'm not sure how much the local IT dept. would approve of that). However it's something I would only consider in a worst-case scenario.
I'm pretty baffled now as to what else to try. If it wasn't working on a different system I would just assume that there's an incompatibility here that can't be fixed.
Any more thoughts, or ideas for troubleshooting?
The Virtual PC idea is a good one, though pretty extreme (and I'm not sure how much the local IT dept. would approve of that). However it's something I would only consider in a worst-case scenario.
I'm pretty baffled now as to what else to try. If it wasn't working on a different system I would just assume that there's an incompatibility here that can't be fixed.
Any more thoughts, or ideas for troubleshooting?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
That's extreme, I agree.
I would discuss this with the IT dept. The must have a test machine with 128 MB ram only to install on just to confirm if too much ram is the problem. Then it will be much easier to decide what to do.
A very different alternative would be to run the app off a terminal server. Not that I know if this combo will work, though.
/gustav
I would discuss this with the IT dept. The must have a test machine with 128 MB ram only to install on just to confirm if too much ram is the problem. Then it will be much easier to decide what to do.
A very different alternative would be to run the app off a terminal server. Not that I know if this combo will work, though.
/gustav
My full Access 95 behaves the same way on WinXP and 1 GB. No go.
I've even tried with a PIF file and Windows 95 compatibility mode but still no go.
/gustav
I've even tried with a PIF file and Windows 95 compatibility mode but still no go.
/gustav
ASKER
Here's something interesting - I just tried installing the full Access 95, and it 'sort of works'.
If I load Access and then open the database it seems to load fine. I say 'seems to' because I haven't setup the workgroup file yet so I was unable to open forms etc. It loaded though. If I launch it from a shortcut, however, I get the same error as before. I will investigate this a bit further, including with the workgroup file in place and tell you what happens.
If I load Access and then open the database it seems to load fine. I say 'seems to' because I haven't setup the workgroup file yet so I was unable to open forms etc. It loaded though. If I launch it from a shortcut, however, I get the same error as before. I will investigate this a bit further, including with the workgroup file in place and tell you what happens.
Have you installed the Jet 3.5 service pack update?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q172733/
This certainly solves a similar problem with A97 running on high memory machines, but I do not recall if it applies to A95 as well.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q172733/
This certainly solves a similar problem with A97 running on high memory machines, but I do not recall if it applies to A95 as well.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
> If I load Access and then open the database it seems to load fine
How do you do that?
/gustav
How do you do that?
/gustav
ASKER
Gustav - that link you posted is the first time I've seen anything that identifies this as a problem, despite a lot of searching (including searching microsoft's site using pretty much the text of the title!) The physical memory is under 1GB though, however the virtual memory raises this up. I might try reducing the virtual memory and see if that helps.
I'm not sure if installing the 3.5 jet drivers will help - aren't they for acc97 only? I have installed the latest 3.0 drivers already.
I have done some more experiments and, as far as I can tell, the DB works fine if you load it into Access manually. By that I mean load Access first, and then load the DB from the file menu. However launching from a shortcut still fails.
I'm not sure if installing the 3.5 jet drivers will help - aren't they for acc97 only? I have installed the latest 3.0 drivers already.
I have done some more experiments and, as far as I can tell, the DB works fine if you load it into Access manually. By that I mean load Access first, and then load the DB from the file menu. However launching from a shortcut still fails.
ASKER
Disabling virtual memory hasn't helped.
I will try playing with the shortcut a little more. I don't understand why loading from the command line fails, but loading from the file menu doesn't.
I will try playing with the shortcut a little more. I don't understand why loading from the command line fails, but loading from the file menu doesn't.
I can't even load it manually, same error.
/gustav
/gustav
This - and the included link - may be for Windows 9x/ME but the sympthoms are identical:
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/20842716/'Out-of-Memory'-message-on-Access95-when-running-more-than-1-GB-of-RAM.html
/gustav
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/20842716/'Out-of-Memory'-message-on-Access95-when-running-more-than-1-GB-of-RAM.html
/gustav
ASKER
We didn't quite get an optimal solution, but using the retail version of Access and loading from within the GUI works, even if it's a bit more cumbersome for my users.
I marked LMSConsulting's suggestion as the accepted answer, even though I got there before I saw his/her post ;-) I also marked Gustav's link to the problem on Microsoft's site, as this information seems to be very hard to locate! However, it was the general help in working through this problem that was so invaluable and that's what I'm awarding the points for, so it's a 50/50 split between the two of you.
Thanks both of you for your help, and if I ever sort out the shortcut issue I'll post a follow-up here.
- Mark
I marked LMSConsulting's suggestion as the accepted answer, even though I got there before I saw his/her post ;-) I also marked Gustav's link to the problem on Microsoft's site, as this information seems to be very hard to locate! However, it was the general help in working through this problem that was so invaluable and that's what I'm awarding the points for, so it's a 50/50 split between the two of you.
Thanks both of you for your help, and if I ever sort out the shortcut issue I'll post a follow-up here.
- Mark
What's odd is that the Runtime is the same thing as the full version ... from my understanding, the only difference is the addition of several registry keys that disable the design features ... although this could be incorrect, I've read it several times in the newsgroups, in answers posted by Access MVPs thus I'd tend to think it's correct. To me, that would me basically no difference between the full retail version and the runtime version, at least as far as your app is concerned.
If you do find anything out, let us know ... and good luck.
If you do find anything out, let us know ... and good luck.
ASKER
I wasn't aware of that. However the behaviour is consistent with the release version because there is no way of opening a database from the runtime GUI - it needs to be specified on the command-line. If it were possible to enable loading from the GUI (e.g. changing these registry settings that you mention) then we may find that it works fine.
- Mark
- Mark
ASKER
Just posting an additional comment for anyone who might be interested.
My home PC, running Win2k SP2, has recently started exhibiting the above behaviour - i.e. it won't load Access 95 DBs from the command line. Previously it worked fine.
Recently I added a futher 512Mb of RAM to my system taking it up to 1Gb in total, so it may be due to this increase in memory (although the other systems mentioned all had 512Mb, which is what I used to have). It is perhaps worth noting that by filling 2 memory slots on my motherboard, the ASUS 'twinbank technology' was automatically enabled which means the memory now works at twice the speed. I don't know if this would have any effect.
Another recent change that could be the cause is the installation of Outlook 2000 (previously I was using 97), although it should be noted that Access 2000 was already installed when everything was working fine. The other problem machines also had Outlook 2000 installed.
I don't know if either of these are the cause, though they seem the most likely candidates. Sorry I don't really have any further light to shed on the problem, but I thought it might be worth noting these few points.
- Mark
My home PC, running Win2k SP2, has recently started exhibiting the above behaviour - i.e. it won't load Access 95 DBs from the command line. Previously it worked fine.
Recently I added a futher 512Mb of RAM to my system taking it up to 1Gb in total, so it may be due to this increase in memory (although the other systems mentioned all had 512Mb, which is what I used to have). It is perhaps worth noting that by filling 2 memory slots on my motherboard, the ASUS 'twinbank technology' was automatically enabled which means the memory now works at twice the speed. I don't know if this would have any effect.
Another recent change that could be the cause is the installation of Outlook 2000 (previously I was using 97), although it should be noted that Access 2000 was already installed when everything was working fine. The other problem machines also had Outlook 2000 installed.
I don't know if either of these are the cause, though they seem the most likely candidates. Sorry I don't really have any further light to shed on the problem, but I thought it might be worth noting these few points.
- Mark
Thanks.
I'm not sure Outlook 2000 would have anything to do with this. I don't have it installed.
/gustav
I'm not sure Outlook 2000 would have anything to do with this. I don't have it installed.
/gustav
ASKER