Search Results

Search found 4 results on 1 pages for 'cbsch'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Is 40+ Logons on Exchange 2003 per user normal?

  - by cbsch

  Hello! We've had a problem at work where users sometimes randomly can't connect to exchange. I've found out that it's because they reached the limit of 32 concurrent logons. I increased the maximum allowed connections by adding the key "Maximum Allowed Sessions Per User" in HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\MSExchangeIS\ParametersSystem. But I'm not sure if this is a real good fix. Looking at the logons some users has as many as 15 logons with the exact same logon time. I know for sure that Outlook 2007 does this, as I was watching them while a user connected with Outlook after a restart on the Exchange service. Every user also has an iPhone connected to exchange, I don't know if these cause the same thing. Is this normal? Could there be a bug in the software? (The Outlook 2007 has nothing configured, except added the user, pure vanilla installs). The users are mobile, and when Outlook generates up to 15 connection every time it connects, and I've read (no sources, sorry) that Outlook doesn't time out connections before 2 hours. I might have to set this number real high to prevent it from being a problem.

  Read the article

• How do I avoid an infinite loop when overriding a virtual property?

  - by cbsch

  Is it possible to ignore set and get when I'm assigning to or retrieving a value? In specific, I'm inheriting from a class that has a property declared like this: virtual public Int32 Value { get; set; } What I'd like to do is to override it and do something useful in those set and get's. The problem appears when I override it, I also have to manually assign, or return the value from the property. If I do something like this: override public Int32 Value { get { return this.Value; } set { this.Value = value; // do something useful } Then I'm creating an infinite loop. Is there a way to set or get the value without invoking the code in set and get, or do I have to make a separate name for the actual variable?

  Read the article

• How do I ignore set and get when assigning or retrieving a value?

  - by cbsch

  Hello. Is it possible to ignore set and get when I'm assigning to or retrieving a value? In specific, I'm inheriting from a class that has a property declared like this: public Int32 Value { get; set; } What I'd like to do is to override it and do something useful in those set and get's. The problem appears when I override it, I also have to manually assign, or return the value from the property. If I do something like this: override public Int32 Value { get { return this.Value; } set { this.Value = value; // do something useful } Then I'm creating an infinite loop. Is there a way to set or get the value without invoking the code in set and get, or do I have to make a separate name for the actual variable?

  Read the article

• How do i supress keypress being printed to console in .NET?

  - by cbsch

  Hello, I'm porting a small C++ console game to C# and it seems that I can't stop key presses from being printed to the console. In C++ I get the keystroke with this method, which also suppress the keystrokes from being printed to the console: bool Game::getInput(char *c) { if (_kbhit()) { *c = _getch(); return true; } return false; } I tried to do the equivalent in C# by doing: Key = Console.ReadKey(); But this does not suppress the character from being printed to the console, causing obvious problems. Any ideas on how to remedy this?

  Read the article

1