Workgroup Connection Problems

We have a small company network consisting of five workstations each running a mix of WinXP home and pro. There is one workstation in this group (running WinXP home) that the other computers map several drives to to be able to access two database files to run certain programs on their workstations. Recently we have added one additional workstation and now the network seems to be down a lot or seems to take a long time for all the workgroup computers to show up and be accessible. When the computers do appear in "My Network Places"  the mapping at times will not re-connect, sometimes after several tries it will finally map to the drive. Sometimes when I try to map a drive to the one WinXP home workstation I get an error message about lack of rights to access the computer and that the number of computers allowed to access the computer with the datatbase files has been exceeded other times I have no problem accessing this computer and do not get any error messages. All the firewall setting are set to off. Does WinXP home have restrictions related to the number of networked computers that can access it?
Who is Participating?
b0lsc0ttConnect With a Mentor IT ManagerCommented:
This MS article does say 5 (
b0lsc0ttIT ManagerCommented:

Yes.  I believe the number is 5.  As far as I know there is no way around this limit in Home edition.  I am trying to find a page to backup the number but that is the number that I remember.  It is definitely low and probably your problem with new computers added.

There was no Limit in Windows 98
Windows 2000 Pro has a limit of 10 Simultaneous Connections
Windows XP Home = 5 Simultaneous Connections
Windows XP Pro = 10 Simultaneous Connections

The connection limit does not apply to third party spplications.

Finally I can say, when a user A, connects to other machine B, it creates a new connection to B. B has a limit of 5 connections. The user A completes his job in 1 min. (Say copy a file from B or Update a Database)
in between these 15 min only 4 new connections can  only be made.

What I am trying to say is We can decrease the Active Time for a connection which is 15 Minutes by Default.;en-us;314882

Just use the below command to change Autodisconnect Time

net config server /autodisconnect:time_before_autodisconnect

Ex. net config server /autodisconnect:1

In the above command the autodisconnect time is set to 1 Minute which is ok for your case.

(If you are copying a file say 200 MB over network which takes 5 minutes to copy there will not be any problem with autodisconnect time which is 1 because it's applicable only on Idle connections.)
Free Tool: Site Down Detector

Helpful to verify reports of your own downtime, or to double check a downed website you are trying to access.

One of a set of tools we are providing to everyone as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

Windows server 2003 standard and enterprise don't have such are allowed unlimited connections (of course considering that you have the appropriate CALs)

It is always recomended to Place your database on a server OS Like Windows 2003 Enterprise since it is going to have a lot of simultaneous connections at the same time.

Reducing Autodisconnect time will affect your Mapped Drives as Disconnected. If a drive is mapped to 5 different computers it is treated as five simultaneous connections, If you are not planning to change the OS then you should remove unnecessary mapping to the system having database.
Windows Server 2003 Standard or Enterprise is overkill for this situation.

I suggest simply moving the database from the XP Home machine to an XP Pro machine, which would have 10 connections.

Problem solved, with no additional work required.
Are we flaming again dclive?  Seems to be an issue w/ you.  Just post your solution.  Leave it up to the initiator of the thread to weigh their answers.  We finds solutions to problems, not problems with solutions.

Is 2003 Standard or Enterprise overkill for a workgroup that is currently without a server, in which XP Pro would resolve the problem with no additional costs?

Part of the job in giving technical solutions is weighing other options.  If posters aren't familiar with the downsides to other options presented, they may choose those options (in real life, not points) and then be sorry later down the road.  An honest but straightforward assessment of issues inherent in other solutions is valuable.  

I don't think that was flaming.  
GeneratorAuthor Commented:
Thanks to everyone who participated in this forum. "b0lsc0tt" came up with the answer first so I will award him the points. The additional information by the other participants especially "sunilcomputer" will be invaluable in future applications. You guys are great!
b0lsc0ttIT ManagerCommented:

I'm glad I could help.  Thanks for the grade, the points and the fun question.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.