|
Help yourself: start writing the application and ask for specific help.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
First of all great subject line.
edmagas wrote: I need help writing this program
Okay, so what have you tried to do?
edmagas wrote: I can not later add, bust network route using a socket
Huh? That makes no sense at all. I don't know that I would want to help someone that want's to bust a network with or without a socket.
edmagas wrote: The program must identify all computers connected to the network no matter the topology
So you just need to enumerate network resources?
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Individuality is fine, as long as we do it together - F. Burns
|
|
|
|
|
yes i need to scan all pc working in network.
|
|
|
|
|
Detecting the "bust network route with a socket" is like "making a car with a screwdriver".
Before seeking a source, learn about the "mechanics": what about routing, how to get routing tables from routers etc.
Otherwise you will get lost in the see of "screws".
2 bugs found.
> recompile ...
65534 bugs found.
|
|
|
|
|
The client server application, is a simple purchase order application
I wish to write each order received by the server sequentially to a file.
What would be best practise?
(1) Keep the file open whilst the program is running, then write each order received during the server session, then close the file when the program ends.
(2) Open then write the record then close the file for each order received
What would be the pros and cons for the above mentioned?
Thanks in advance Simon
|
|
|
|
|
Which one is more attractive? Well, number 2 is more flexible in case someone else has to edit/archive orders... unless you are running into performance problems, which would make number 1 the more attractive contender in this battle of designs.
|
|
|
|
|
No. 1 is better in terms of performance.
You could give it read share access if any other program wishes to read the same file when it is kept open.
|
|
|
|
|
simon alec smith wrote: (2) Open then write the record then close the file for each order received
I always prefer (2) one, because if there is any crash, chances of data-loss is very much.
Secondly it also depend how frequently is data coming, if it quite fast, then option 1 also stands good.
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
Never mind - my own stupidity is the source of every "problem" - Mixture
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and You
|
|
|
|
|
As the others have mentioned keeping the file open will be faster but second will be more secure if something goes wrong.
You might be able to get some of the the performance of keeping the file open with opening and closing it every time by opening the file unbuffered. This[^] has got loads of useful info about the pain in the neck this is to sector align buffers if you're on windows. You can do something similar on Linux with the open() system call.
It all depends on how much money's involved if something goes wrong and how much the customer is willing to pay for security. Another solution might be to open and close the file every transaction and make sure the powers that be spend the money they'd have spent on you engineering a software solution on more memory for the server to reduce the impact of repeated opens and closes.
Another option might be to try the double open trick that used to work years ago on some Unixen and DOS. You'll have to see if this does any good, I've not used it on any version of windows since Windows '95. What you do is open the file when the program starts. This makes a second opening really quick when you write a transaction. when you finish writing the transaction you close the file which flushes it to disk. Finally when the program terminates you close the original opening.
Cheers,
Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Ive successfully injected my .dll file, using the native API NtCreateThreadEx(), into the system process, such as lsass.exe. But its strange that my codes in the .dll file just dont work. However, if I inject it into user processes, such as explorer.exe, that .dll file can work perfectly. So I just cannot get around this prob. Can anyone help? Thanx in advance!
My developing environment is: VC2008 and Vista.
|
|
|
|
|
Under Vista and Windows 7, security was increased for this kind of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Im wondering whether you could explain it to me in greater details .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krauze wrote: Im wondering whether you could explain it to me in greater details .
Just imagine if it was easy to do what you want to do.
Now, I realise that you are a Saint who spends all winter bringing the homeless blankets and dinner, a regular Nobel peace prize winner [*], but I have an uncomfortable truth to give you...
Not all computer people are as nice as you. Some of them are even bad people. And not just CPallini either!
Iain.
[*] A special prize to whoever recognises where I stolereused these lyrics from.
I am one of "those foreigners coming over here and stealing our jobs". Yay me!
|
|
|
|
|
It has to be Leann Womack!
(Either I'm right and just know this kind of stuff, or Google is wrong)
|
|
|
|
|
You are correct. It really is a classic song! Full of perky jealousy!
I already owe you a beer - you really should leave that southern region and come up where the real folk live so I can buy you two.
Iain.
I am one of "those foreigners coming over here and stealing our jobs". Yay me!
|
|
|
|
|
Now that's the type of message I would rate a 5.
Not due to the geographical insinuations.
Nor the musical references.
I don't really know, but it just appeals to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why not fix this post so that only the relevant lines of code are shown? Everything else is just noise that gets in the way. Don't forget to wrap the code snippet in <pre> tags.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"Man who follows car will be exhausted." - Confucius
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the big code chunk. Now I am planning to use IWebBrowser2 com object to call JScript from MFC application. My problem definition in the previous post remains same. Can you please provide me the steps and possible code snippets to implement the same? I already have the MFC application built, now need to use IWebBrowser2 com object to call a JScript. Any help?
|
|
|
|
|
Please understand that some may view your question thusly:
Hello! I have one project to make a picture frame and paint a picture inside of it.
So far, I have bought the picture frame. This is very good. Now all I have to do is
paint the picture to go inside the frame.
Is there anybody who can provide me the steps and techniques required to paint this picture.
C'mon tiger, knuckle down and do some work!!
|
|
|
|
|
See here.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"Man who follows car will be exhausted." - Confucius
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I have a windows service which I am trying to run under local system account.
It fails with the "error 1053:did not respond in timely manner." This service runs well on Windows 2003 Server.
I found Service Hardening enhancemnets made in Windows 2008.
It states that if no privilges mentioned for that service means service has all the privilges available for that account.
It is given to support backward compatibility.
When I attach the service to application verifier tool it runs propely when I check LuaPriv.
Once a while when it failed when attached to Apllication Verifier it gave following error.
<avrf:message>Access was restricted to trusted users only.</avrf:message> <br />
<avrf:formatmessage>RegOpenKeyExA: Key (\REGISTRY\MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Services\WinSock2\Parameters) only grants requested 'KEY_SET_VALUE' to 'BUILTIN\Administrators, NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM'</avrf:formatmessage>
The service is already running under Local System Accoun(NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM).
Can someone give me hint or pointers to solve this problem?
I am really stucked here. I already googled for lot of information but no luck.
Thanks and Regards,
Mahesh R. Kulkarni
The secret of life is not enjoyment
but education through experience.
- Swami Vivekananda.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Please give some inputs. I am waiting for some clues to move forward.
Regards,
Mahesh R. Kulkarni
The secret of life is not enjoyment
but education through experience.
- Swami Vivekananda.
|
|
|
|
|
Give a look here[^]
2 bugs found.
> recompile ...
65534 bugs found.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
Now with 24% more Twitter