According to Michael Dykman <mdykman@stripped> on Fri, 02/24/12 at 13:23:
>
> At this point, I would not know what else to do except fire up
> wireshark and start debugging the packets.
Well, doesn't that beat all, sigh... Now I'm back to square zero... :-(
> Are both servers on the same subnet?
Negative.
> Is your DBVisualizer client local to either of these or on the same
> subnet as one and not another?
The DbVisualizer client tool is local to the 5.1.60 server.
> You mentioned a minor version difference between the servers.. Have
> you read the relevant release notes between those versions?
I think that might be a next step, but even more expedient would be
upgrading the 5.1.58 server to 5.1.60 or 5.1.61 version and retest.
> This looks like an ugly one. I don't envy you.
Gee, thanks for those words of encouragement - NOT! :-)
Regards,
web...
--
William Bulley Email: web@stripped
72 characters width template ----------------------------------------->|
| Thread |
|---|
| • two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | William Bulley | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | Michael Dykman | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | William Bulley | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | Michael Dykman | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | William Bulley | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | Michael Dykman | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | William Bulley | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | Andrew Moore | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | Michael Dykman | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | William Bulley | 24 Feb |
| • Re: two 5.1 servers, different behaviour | William Bulley | 24 Feb |