Search Results

Search found 3053 results on 123 pages for 'resolution'.

Page 12/123 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • How do I improve my screen resolution in Windows Remote Desktop?

    - by Jeff
    I'm RDP'ing into a Win2K3 machine from a WinXP machine, and I cannot stand the low screen resolution I get on the Win2K3 box. Text is too large and the graphics/colors aren't very smooth. How do I improve this? If I right-click on the desktop of the remote machine and go to Properties - Settings, I see that the screen resolution is set to 1280x1024 (should be okay, I would think), and the color quality is Medium (16 bit) (not optimal) and I don't have the option to change either setting (because they're set in the .rdp file for the session, right?). If I move over to the Appearance tab, I see that font size is set to Normal, with no option to make it smaller. The thing is, these settings are close to what I have on the XP machine I'm RDP'ing in from. The only difference (in those settings) is the color quality, which is 32 bit. Any ideas on how I can improve the situation? Other tidbits: The graphics card on the Win2K3 machine is ATI ES1000. I think I have the latest drivers for it. I'm running VMware Workstation on the Win2K3 machine, and if I create a Win2K3 VM and RDP into it from the XP machine, the resolution is just fine.

    Read the article

  • 2560 x 1600 screen resolution not available when a second monitor is attached.

    - by sgmoore
    I am running Windows 7 (64-bit edition) and have a 30" Dell 3007WFP monitor which runs at a screen resolution of 2560 x 1600. This works perfectly until I try to connect a second monitor, and then the screen resolution on the main monitor immediately drops to 1280x800 and I can't change it back up to the correct resolution until I disconnect the second monitor. The graphics card is a Nvidia Quadro FX 370. This has a dual link DVI connector (to which the 30" is connected) and a single link DVI connector. The second monitor can run at 1920x1080 and is connected using a VGA to DVI connector. Note, it does not seem to matter whether the second monitor is running at 1920x1080 or even at 800x600. Windows reports Total Available Graphics Memory: 3839MB Dedicated Video Memory: 256MB System Video Memory: 0MB Shared System Memory: 3583MB Does anyone know if this a limitation with the video card, memory, drivers, connectors or something else? If this is a limitation with the video card, can anyone recommend a PCI Express 16 card that would support at least this setup, but preferably support two 30" monitors both running 2560 x 1600. (I'm not into gaming etc, so it doesn't need to be very powerful)

    Read the article

  • Why does the screen resolution of 1440x900 suddenly disappears from Intel GMA Control Panel?

    - by GeneQ
    I'm using a Vostro 1200 laptop with the Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset powering its graphics and running Vista 32-bit SP2 . I've been using the Vostro with a Dell SE198WFP LCD Monitor as the external display since day one for about two years without any problems. Recently, I plugged the Vostro into a couple of other monitors. The problem is, now the native resolution for my main monitor's (the SE198WFP) resolution of 1440x900 @ 60 Hz is no longer available. (See below) I've tried everything from uninstalling and reinstalling the Intel drivers as well as the monitor drivers to no avail. I've Goggled that this problem and it appears that this has happened to other people but all the answers involve people giving up in frustration or reinstalling; both terrible outcomes. Has anybody ever figured why this happens and have a good solution? Thanks. UPDATE: This dude has a complicated solution, which I haven't tried yet. His explanations for the problem was After an exausting search for an answer to the matter of why my brand new 19? widescreen monitor’s native resolution (1440×900) was unavailible (sic) in the display properties, I finally stumbled upon an article a person posted on Intel’s forums that basically explained what shannanigans Intel had been up to with their GMA 950 line of onboard graphic solutions. Not very comforting.

    Read the article

  • NASA Releases Highest Resolution Photo of Mars Ever Seen

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Whether you’re in the mood for a high-resolution extraterrestrial wallpaper or just want to take a very close peek at the surface of Mars, this 23096 x 7681 resolution image ought to do the trick. Courtesy of NASA and Oppurtunity–the Mars Exploration Rover seen in the photo–the panoramic image was captured during the last Martian winter, between the Earth dates of December 21, 2001 and May 8, 2012. Hit up the link below to grab a full-resolution copy as well as read more about the geologic formations seen in the picture and the activities of the rover. ‘Greeley Panorama’ from Opportunity’s Fifth Martian Winter [Nasa] How to Use an Xbox 360 Controller On Your Windows PC Download the Official How-To Geek Trivia App for Windows 8 How to Banish Duplicate Photos with VisiPic

    Read the article

  • CreateRenderTarget returns 0x80070057 in big surface resolution

    - by senggen
    I have created the SLI merged desktop of three 1920x1680 monitors, so the desktop resolution is 5760x1080. There is a 0x80070057 error, while calling CreateRenderTarget to create the RT_Surface: IDirect3DSurface9* _render_surface; HRESULT hr = _device->CreateRenderTarget( _desktop_width * 2, _desktop_height + 1, D3DFMT_A8R8G8B8, D3DMULTISAMPLE_NONE, 0, TRUE, &_render_surface, NULL); It works OK with desktop resolution 1024x768, and the total resolution is 3072x768. In http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb174361(v=vs.85).aspx, it says If the method succeeds, the return value is D3D_OK. If the method fails, the return value can be one of the following: D3DERR_NOTAVAILABLE, D3DERR_INVALIDCALL, D3DERR_OUTOFVIDEOMEMORY, E_OUTOFMEMORY. and no description about 0x80070057. HRESULT: 0x80070057 (2147942487) Name: E_INVALIDARG Description: An invalid parameter was passed to the returning function Somebody please help me.

    Read the article

  • Unable to overscan at lower resolution with AMD ATI

    - by Basavaraj
    I am running Ubuntu 12.04 with the latest ATI drivers installed. I have the catalyst option but I am unable to set overscan. My default resolution is 1920*1080 on 15inch display. I want to set it to a lower resolution. But on setting it to any lower resolution the display shrinks i.e I see black chopped off display on the left and on the right :( Really frustrating this, wasted hours on this already. I realized that this is referred to as overscan, but the ATI Catalyst Administrative just does not allow me to set the option. Can someone please through some light on this topic?

    Read the article

  • Grub-Efi wrong resolution

    - by Nikki Kononov
    My question, as it comes from the title, related to grub, but it's a different thing. I re-installed Windows 7 and Ubuntu 12.10 in UEFI mode (before that I was using normal BIOS) and everything went perfectly fine. Both systems load as they should but there is one thing that keeps bothering me. The problem is before I installed both systems in UEFI I used to boot in both system using common grub (non-uefi) and resolution in this grub was correct (which is 1366x768). Right now with grub-efi I have wrong resolution (which is seems to be 640x480). So my question is can can I safely set grub-resolution using grub config files or issue is related to something else? (for instance graphics card). I am using Ubuntu 12.10 Intel HD 3000 + Nvidia GT 540M Optimus (I am using bumblebee) Kernel 3.5.0-19-generic all updates installed! I also added ubuntu x-swat ppa for drivers. Thank you for your help!

    Read the article

  • High resolution CLI?

    - by Mike Williamson
    I want the resolution of my console to match my screen resolution(1440x900). 1024x768 works fine but for some reason when I put 1440x900 when I switch to ttyX the command prompt is almost right off the bottom of the screen! The Ubuntu splash screen goes off the edge of the screen during boot as well. Here is my /etc/default/grub 4 GRUB_DEFAULT=0 5 GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=0 6 GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT_QUIET=true 7 GRUB_TIMEOUT=10 8 GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR=`lsb_release -i -s 2> /dev/null || echo Debian` 9 GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="quiet splash" 10 GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="" 11 GRUB_GFXMODE=1440x900 12 GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep How do I get my CLI resolution to be 1440x900?

    Read the article

  • "input not supported" at login screen after ati driver is installed

    - by squalo78
    I'm running ubuntu 11.10 and I installed the Ati driver from the oficial page. When i reboot, the grub and the splash screen are working (at lower resolution) but instead of the login screen, it shows "input not supported" message. If I use "Ctrl+Alt+ keypad +" I can see my login screen at 640x480 resolution and login. I don't know how to make login screen displays 1440x900@60, that is the resolution set on my session. I'm running Ubuntu 11.10 with ati hd4200 video card, a monitor acer aL1916w that supports the resolution 1440x900.

    Read the article

  • 12.04 + Alienware M11x R2 + Bumblebee 3.0 = low resolution only

    - by user89171
    I had a fresh install of Ubuntu 12.04 on my Alienware M11x, and it worked with the native monitor resolution of 1366x768. In trying to get the Optimus chipset working, I installed Bumblebee 3.0. Now, I am only offered 640x480 for my monitor resolution. Graphically, Unity 3D appears to be working now, instead of the Unity 2D I had before, so something went right, but I don't know how I can get it to offer me any higher resolutions than 640x480. I've looked up many pages that address this topic, but nothing that I've seen suggested has worked. sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bumblebee/stable sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get install bumblebee-nvidia was the latest thing I tried. I've tried some variants of this, I've been sure to uninstall nvidia drivers prior to reinstalling Bumblebee and various video drivers. Does anyone have any clue as to how I can get back to native resolution?

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – SQL Server Misconceptions and Resolution – A Practical Perspective – TechEd 2012 India

    - by pinaldave
    TechEd India 2012 is just around the corner and I will be presenting there in two different sessions. On the very first day of this event, my presentation will be all about SQL Server Misconceptions and Resolution – A Practical Perspective. The dictionary tells us that a “misconception” means a view or opinion that is incorrect and is based on faulty thinking or understanding. In SQL Server, there are so many misconceptions. In fact, when I hear some of these misconceptions, I feel like fainting at that very moment! Seriously, at one time, I came across the scenario where instead of using INSERT INTO…SELECT, the developer used CURSOR believing that cursor is faster (duh!). Here is the link the blog post related to this. Pinal and Vinod in 2009 I have been presenting in TechEd India for last three years. This is my fourth opportunity to present a technical session on SQL Server. Just like the previous years, I decided to present something different. Here is a novelty of this year: I will be presenting this session with Vinod Kumar. Vinod Kumar and I have a great synergy when we work together. So far, we have written one SQL Server Interview Questions and Answers book and 2 video courses: (1) SQL Server Questions and Answers (2) SQL Server Performance: Indexing Basics. Pinal and Vinod in 2011 When we sat together and started building an outline for this course, we had many options in mind for this tango session. However, we have decided that we will make this session as lively as possible while keeping it natural at the same time. We know our flow and we know our conversation highlight, but we do not know what exactly each of us is going to present. We have decided to challenge each other on stage and push each other’s knowledge to the verge. We promise that the session will be entertaining with lots of SQL Server trivia, tips and tricks. Here are the challenges that I’ll take on: I will puzzle Vinod with my difficult questions I will present such misconception that Vinod will have no resolution for it. I need your help.  Will you help me stump Vinod? If yes, come and attend our session and join me to prove that together we are superior (a friendly brain clash, but we must win!). SQL Server enthusiasts and SQL Server fans are going to have gala time at #TechEdIn as we have a very solid lineup of the speaker and extremely interesting sessions at TechEdIn. Read the complete blog post of Vinod. Session Details Title: SQL Server Misconceptions and Resolution – A Practical Perspective (Add to Calendar) Abstract: “Earth is flat”! – An ancient common misconception, which has been proven incorrect as we progressed in modern times. In this session we will see various database misconceptions prevailing and their resolution with the aid of the demos. In this unique session audience will be part of the conversation and resolution. Date and Time: March 21, 2012, 15:15 to 16:15 Location: Hotel Lalit Ashok - Kumara Krupa High Grounds, Bengaluru – 560001, Karnataka, India. Add to Calendar Please submit your questions in the comments area and I will be for sure discussing them during my session. If I pick your question to discuss during my session, here is your gift I commit right now – SQL Server Interview Questions and Answers Book. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Interview Questions and Answers, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology Tagged: TechEd, TechEdIn

    Read the article

  • Remote connect into macbook pro at a different resolution

    - by user60277
    Hello, I have a Dell laptop with Windows 7 on it. Its resolution is 1920x1080. I want to connect to a macbook pro at that resolution. The macbook pro has a resolution of 1440x900 so when I VNC into it, I can only see 1440x900 box with black borders on full resolution. The macbook pro can drive resolutions of 2560x1440. What program do I use to connect to the macbook at full (1920x1080) resolution. I can use remote desktop and connect from the dell laptop to another dell laptop that has a 1440x900 max. resolution. However in case of Remote desktop connection I can expand the window to be 1920x1080. I'm using TightVNC viewer on Windows. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Remote connect into macbook pro at a different resolution

    - by user60277
    Hello, I have a Dell laptop with Windows 7 on it. Its resolution is 1920x1080. I want to connect to a macbook pro at that resolution. The macbook pro has a resolution of 1440x900 so when I VNC into it, I can only see 1440x900 box with black borders on full resolution. The macbook pro can drive resolutions of 2560x1440. What program do I use to connect to the macbook at full (1920x1080) resolution. I can use remote desktop and connect from the dell laptop to another dell laptop that has a 1440x900 max. resolution. However in case of Remote desktop connection I can expand the window to be 1920x1080. I'm using TightVNC viewer on Windows. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Bad Resolution. Running Three screens at the same time

    - by Carl
    Hi I am currently using three screens at the same time with my ATI 5770 & an active displayport converter. The thing is that the third screen ( the one that is using the active displayport converter ) is showing terrible resolution compared to my other two screens. ( Samsung syncmaster p23 ) two of my screens got a max resolution of 1920* 1090, meanwhile the third on is only capable of 1600 * 1200. Do any of u guys got any solution to this problem? Btw, This is how the Active Displayport converter looks like http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Cables/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=330-5521#Overview

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to get a 10000x10000 virtual resolution desktop?

    - by pingo
    I have a java applet map viewer and I'd like to plot out the map it displays. To do that I need to open it in a high enough resolution to avoid too much stitching. Is there any possible way I could get a desktop with such high resolution? So far I've been able to use panning 2560x1920 by booting windows 7 in VmWare Player. Would it be possible to get it higher? Maybe this would be doable on Linux? The whole thing can be laggy as hell as long as it will render my screenshot...

    Read the article

  • "Fails to get size of gamma" error when trying to set resolution

    - by Max Payne
    On 11.10 my max allowed resolution is 1024x768, while my monitor supports 1280x800 on windows. I've seen a method to solve this via xrandr, but I allways get a message saying it fails to get size of gamma. xrandr: Failed to get size of gamma for output default Screen 0: minimum 640 x 480, current 1024 x 768, maximum 1024 x 768 default connected 1024x768+0+0 0mm x 0mm 1024x768 61.0* 800x600 61.0 640x480 60.0 Is there any other way to add 1280x800 resolution to my laptop, any workarounds this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to adjust Skype webcam resolution

    - by Felix Elnan
    I have finally gotten my webcam (philips spc 300nc) working in Skype, and i thought i was all set. But the resolution is to low (176x144) so it zoomz in on the side of my face. I downloaded guvcview and set the resolution to 352x288 and it showed perfectly, until i tried to start the webcam in Skype, beacause there it stil was in 176x144. I cant really figure out why. I preload skype with v4l2convert.so and the webcam works great in both Cheese, and guvcview.

    Read the article

  • Can't get ubuntu 12.04 to set pixel resolution higher than 1360x768

    - by walt
    Can't get ubuntu 12.04 to set pixel resolution higher than 1360x768. Very new to linux liking it other than this lol. I have a dell xps 420 with a nvidia geforce 260 hooked up to my 55 inch tv through a dvi/hdmi adapter.The display program wont set the resolution above 1360x768.I have tried the two "additional driver" options for the graphics card and the Details Window doesn't recognise with either driver.

    Read the article

  • Geforce(410m with CUDA) screen resolution on Ubuntu 12.04 issue

    - by Marco K
    I made a succesful installation of Ubuntu 12.04 64-bit on my Sony Vaio PCG-71811M. I have a Geforce 410M with CUDA,it seems works fine and i have already installed packages nvidia-current and nvidia-settings at version 302.17 (I think it's the latest in this moment), but my maximum screen resolution is 1366x768(and in the native display settings it's the same thing). How can I switch it to an highest resolution, like 1920x1080?

    Read the article

  • How to change screen resolution for installation

    - by Embercastle
    I am trying to install Unity on an old computer with a 1.7 ghz cpu but the installation windows only show the top quarter of the window (so unable to see or select all the prompts in the window). I have tired going to system settings, but because I cannot see all of windows, I cannot change system settings to make the resolution smaller. Is there any way to change the resolution so that I can see the full window so that I can complete the installation?

    Read the article

  • How to detect and configure an output with xrandr?

    - by ysap
    I have a DELL U2410 monitor connected to a Compaq 100B desktop equipped with an integrated AMD/ATI graphics card (AMD E-350). The installed O/S is Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. The computer is connected to the monitor via the DVI connection. The problem is that I cannot set the desktop resolution to the native 1920x1200. The maximum allowed resolution is 1600x1200. Doing some research I found about the xrandr utility. Unfortunately, when trying to use it I cannot configure it to the required resolution. First, it does not report the output name (which supposed to be DVI-0), saying default instead. Without it I cannot use the --fb option. The EDID utility seems to identify the monitor well. Here's the output from get-edid: # EDID version 1 revision 3 Section "Monitor" # Block type: 2:0 3:ff # Block type: 2:0 3:fc Identifier "DELL U2410" VendorName "DEL" ModelName "DELL U2410" # Block type: 2:0 3:ff # Block type: 2:0 3:fc # Block type: 2:0 3:fd HorizSync 30-81 VertRefresh 56-76 # Max dot clock (video bandwidth) 170 MHz # DPMS capabilities: Active off:yes Suspend:yes Standby:yes Mode "1920x1200" # vfreq 59.950Hz, hfreq 74.038kHz DotClock 154.000000 HTimings 1920 1968 2000 2080 VTimings 1200 1203 1209 1235 Flags "-HSync" "+VSync" EndMode # Block type: 2:0 3:ff # Block type: 2:0 3:fc # Block type: 2:0 3:fd EndSection but the xrandr -q command returns: Screen 0: minimum 640 x 400, current 1600 x 1200, maximum 1600 x 1200 default connected 1600x1200+0+0 0mm x 0mm 1600x1200 0.0* 1280x1024 0.0 1152x864 0.0 1024x768 0.0 800x600 0.0 640x480 0.0 720x400 0.0 When I try to set the resolution, I get: $ xrandr --fb 1920x1200 xrandr: screen cannot be larger than 1600x1200 (desired size 1920x1200) $ xrandr --output DVI-0 --auto warning: output DVI-0 not found; ignoring How can I set the screen resolution to 1920x1200? Why doesn't xrandr identify the DVI-0 output? Note that the same computer running Ubuntu version higher than 10.04 detects the correct resolution with no problems. On this machine I cannot upgrade due to some legacy hardware compatibility problems. Also, I don't see any optional screen drivers available in the Hardware Drivers dialog. ---- UPDATE: following the answer to this question, I got some advance. Now the required mode is listed in the xrandr -q list, but I can't switch to that mode. Using the Monitors applet (which now shows the new mode), I get the response that: The selected configuration for displays could not be applied. Could not set the configuration to CRTC 262. From the command line it looks like this: $ cvt 1920 1200 60 # 1920x1200 59.88 Hz (CVT 2.30MA) hsync: 74.56 kHz; pclk: 193.25 MHz Modeline "1920x1200_60.00" 193.25 1920 2056 2256 2592 1200 1203 1209 1245 -hsync +vsync $ xrandr --newmode "1920x1200_60.00" 193.25 1920 2056 2256 2592 1200 1203 1209 1245 -hsync +vsync $ xrandr -q Screen 0: minimum 640 x 400, current 1600 x 1200, maximum 1600 x 1200 default connected 1600x1200+0+0 0mm x 0mm 1600x1200 0.0* 1280x1024 0.0 1152x864 0.0 1024x768 0.0 800x600 0.0 640x480 0.0 720x400 0.0 1920x1200_60.00 (0x120) 193.0MHz h: width 1920 start 2056 end 2256 total 2592 skew 0 clock 74.5KHz v: height 1200 start 1203 end 1209 total 1245 clock 59.8Hz $ xrandr --addmode default 1920x1200_60.00 $ xrandr -q Screen 0: minimum 640 x 400, current 1600 x 1200, maximum 1600 x 1200 default connected 1600x1200+0+0 0mm x 0mm 1600x1200 0.0* 1280x1024 0.0 1152x864 0.0 1024x768 0.0 800x600 0.0 640x480 0.0 720x400 0.0 1920x1200_60.00 59.8 $ xrandr --output default --mode 1920x1200_60.00 xrandr: Configure crtc 0 failed Another piece of info (if it helps anyone): $ sudo lshw -c video *-display UNCLAIMED description: VGA compatible controller product: ATI Technologies Inc vendor: ATI Technologies Inc physical id: 1 bus info: pci@0000:00:01.0 version: 00 width: 32 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm pciexpress msi bus_master cap_list configuration: latency=0 resources: memory:c0000000-cfffffff(prefetchable) ioport:f000(size=256) memory:feb00000-feb3ffff

    Read the article

  • C# 4 Named Parameters for Overload Resolution

    - by Steve Michelotti
    C# 4 is getting a new feature called named parameters. Although this is a stand-alone feature, it is often used in conjunction with optional parameters. Last week when I was giving a presentation on C# 4, I got a question on a scenario regarding overload resolution that I had not considered before which yielded interesting results. Before I describe the scenario, a little background first. Named parameters is a well documented feature that works like this: suppose you have a method defined like this: 1: void DoWork(int num, string message = "Hello") 2: { 3: Console.WriteLine("Inside DoWork() - num: {0}, message: {1}", num, message); 4: } This enables you to call the method with any of these: 1: DoWork(21); 2: DoWork(num: 21); 3: DoWork(21, "abc"); 4: DoWork(num: 21, message: "abc"); and the corresponding results will be: Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: Hello Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: Hello Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: abc Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: abc This is all pretty straight forward and well-documented. What is slightly more interesting is how resolution is handled with method overloads. Suppose we had a second overload for DoWork() that looked like this: 1: void DoWork(object num) 2: { 3: Console.WriteLine("Inside second overload: " + num); 4: } The first rule applied for method overload resolution in this case is that it looks for the most strongly-type match first.  Hence, since the second overload has System.Object as the parameter rather than Int32, this second overload will never be called for any of the 4 method calls above.  But suppose the method overload looked like this: 1: void DoWork(int num) 2: { 3: Console.WriteLine("Inside second overload: " + num); 4: } In this case, both overloads have the first parameter as Int32 so they both fulfill the first rule equally.  In this case the overload with the optional parameters will be ignored if the parameters are not specified. Therefore, the same 4 method calls from above would result in: Inside second overload: 21 Inside second overload: 21 Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: abc Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: abc Even all this is pretty well documented. However, we can now consider the very interesting scenario I was presented with. The question was what happens if you change the parameter name in one of the overloads.  For example, what happens if you change the parameter *name* for the second overload like this: 1: void DoWork(int num2) 2: { 3: Console.WriteLine("Inside second overload: " + num2); 4: } In this case, the first 2 method calls will yield *different* results: 1: DoWork(21); 2: DoWork(num: 21); results in: Inside second overload: 21 Inside DoWork() - num: 21, message: Hello We know the first method call will go to the second overload because of normal method overload resolution rules which ignore the optional parameters.  But for the second call, even though all the same rules apply, the compiler will allow you to specify a named parameter which, in effect, overrides the typical rules and directs the call to the first overload. Keep in mind this would only work if the method overloads had different parameter names for the same types (which in itself is weird). But it is a situation I had not considered before and it is one in which you should be aware of the rules that the C# 4 compiler applies.

    Read the article

  • Do glue records in non-circular dns-lookups speed up domain resolution or not?

    - by Joe Hopfgartner
    Doing a lookup for my domain on http://www.intodns.com/ I noticed theese two messages: In Parent section: DNS Parent sent Glue The parent nameserver g.gtld-servers.net is not sending out GLUE for every nameservers listed, meaning he is sending out your nameservers host names without sending the A records of those nameservers. It's ok but you have to know that this will require an extra A lookup that can delay a little the connections to your site. This happens a lot if you have nameservers on different TLD (domain.com for example with nameserver ns.domain.org.) and in NS section: Glue for NS records INFO: GLUE was not sent when I asked your nameservers for your NS records.This is ok but you should know that in this case an extra A record lookup is required in order to get the IPs of your NS records. The nameservers without glue are: 109.230.225.96 84.201.40.52 You can fix this for example by adding A records to your nameservers for the zones listed above. I do perfectly understand that the primary objective of glue records is to resolve circular dependencies. The classic use case: my domain is example.com and I want to have the nameserver ns1.example.com. This will never work because i cannot know the ip of ns1.example.com if I don't fetch example.com and in order to do that I need to fetch it from ns1.example.com. To resolve this deadlock I add a glue record to ns1.example.com containing the ip adress of the nameserver, so this can work out. So this problem does not occour if the nameservers are in a different TLD than the domain i want to look up. But however to fetch the zone information from the nameservers I need to know their ip adress right? And in order to know that i need to fetch the zone the nameservers are in from their respective nameservers, right? (or rather my ISP needs to do that in the background) So an extra lookup that takes time? If I now have glue records, I know the IP adress right away without the need to look it up - so this should speed up the resolution of my domain, shouldnt it? However my DNS zone provider (tecserver.at) replied that this would make no sense because "we are not running ns1.ourdomain.com an ns1.ourdomain.com as authorative NS for ourdomain.com. This would be the only sense for glue records. Tecserver has a glue record because the NS for tecserver.at are ns1.tecserver.at and ns2.tecserver.at. Therefore a glue record is needed for resolution.

    Read the article

  • What can I do to avoid losing original resolution when uploading or exporting photos from Picasa?

    - by Janet Levin
    I'm not a programmer, and/but after multiple email discussions and google searches confirmed the problem I'm describing, and after making changes in picasa preferences with no change in resolution loss (from say, 800kb original image to 235kb after export or upload), I'm at a dead end and thinking the answer may lie among you folks, even though I barely understand the language here.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >