Search Results

Search found 16237 results on 650 pages for 'lock free'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 53/650 | < Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >

  • Les opérateurs historiques versent des dividendes « colossaux » et investissent peu, selon Free Mobile qui répond aux attaques

    Free Mobile : Xavier Niel répond aux attaques des opérateurs historiques Qui verseraient des dividendes « colossaux » mais qui investiraient peu De nombreuses voix se sont exprimées contre Free Mobile depuis son lancement. Les syndicats de France Telecom (pour qui « Free Mobile prend les français pour des cons »). Les filiales pros de la concurrence (qui qualifient Free d'« offre low cost inadaptée aux PME »). Des universitaires,

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: Interlocked CompareExchange()

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. Two posts ago, I discussed the Interlocked Add(), Increment(), and Decrement() methods (here) for adding and subtracting values in a thread-safe, lightweight manner.  Then, last post I talked about the Interlocked Read() and Exchange() methods (here) for safely and efficiently reading and setting 32 or 64 bit values (or references).  This week, we’ll round out the discussion by talking about the Interlocked CompareExchange() method and how it can be put to use to exchange a value if the current value is what you expected it to be. Dirty reads can lead to bad results Many of the uses of Interlocked that we’ve explored so far have centered around either reading, setting, or adding values.  But what happens if you want to do something more complex such as setting a value based on the previous value in some manner? Perhaps you were creating an application that reads a current balance, applies a deposit, and then saves the new modified balance, where of course you’d want that to happen atomically.  If you read the balance, then go to save the new balance and between that time the previous balance has already changed, you’ll have an issue!  Think about it, if we read the current balance as $400, and we are applying a new deposit of $50.75, but meanwhile someone else deposits $200 and sets the total to $600, but then we write a total of $450.75 we’ve lost $200! Now, certainly for int and long values we can use Interlocked.Add() to handles these cases, and it works well for that.  But what if we want to work with doubles, for example?  Let’s say we wanted to add the numbers from 0 to 99,999 in parallel.  We could do this by spawning several parallel tasks to continuously add to a total: 1: double total = 0; 2:  3: Parallel.For(0, 10000, next => 4: { 5: total += next; 6: }); Were this run on one thread using a standard for loop, we’d expect an answer of 4,999,950,000 (the sum of all numbers from 0 to 99,999).  But when we run this in parallel as written above, we’ll likely get something far off.  The result of one of my runs, for example, was 1,281,880,740.  That is way off!  If this were banking software we’d be in big trouble with our clients.  So what happened?  The += operator is not atomic, it will read in the current value, add the result, then store it back into the total.  At any point in all of this another thread could read a “dirty” current total and accidentally “skip” our add.   So, to clean this up, we could use a lock to guarantee concurrency: 1: double total = 0.0; 2: object locker = new object(); 3:  4: Parallel.For(0, count, next => 5: { 6: lock (locker) 7: { 8: total += next; 9: } 10: }); Which will give us the correct result of 4,999,950,000.  One thing to note is that locking can be heavy, especially if the operation being locked over is trivial, or the life of the lock is a high percentage of the work being performed concurrently.  In the case above, the lock consumes pretty much all of the time of each parallel task – and the task being locked on is relatively trivial. Now, let me put in a disclaimer here before we go further: For most uses, lock is more than sufficient for your needs, and is often the simplest solution!    So, if lock is sufficient for most needs, why would we ever consider another solution?  The problem with locking is that it can suspend execution of your thread while it waits for the signal that the lock is free.  Moreover, if the operation being locked over is trivial, the lock can add a very high level of overhead.  This is why things like Interlocked.Increment() perform so well, instead of locking just to perform an increment, we perform the increment with an atomic, lockless method. As with all things performance related, it’s important to profile before jumping to the conclusion that you should optimize everything in your path.  If your profiling shows that locking is causing a high level of waiting in your application, then it’s time to consider lighter alternatives such as Interlocked. CompareExchange() – Exchange existing value if equal some value So let’s look at how we could use CompareExchange() to solve our problem above.  The general syntax of CompareExchange() is: T CompareExchange<T>(ref T location, T newValue, T expectedValue) If the value in location == expectedValue, then newValue is exchanged.  Either way, the value in location (before exchange) is returned. Actually, CompareExchange() is not one method, but a family of overloaded methods that can take int, long, float, double, pointers, or references.  It cannot take other value types (that is, can’t CompareExchange() two DateTime instances directly).  Also keep in mind that the version that takes any reference type (the generic overload) only checks for reference equality, it does not call any overridden Equals(). So how does this help us?  Well, we can grab the current total, and exchange the new value if total hasn’t changed.  This would look like this: 1: // grab the snapshot 2: double current = total; 3:  4: // if the total hasn’t changed since I grabbed the snapshot, then 5: // set it to the new total 6: Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref total, current + next, current); So what the code above says is: if the amount in total (1st arg) is the same as the amount in current (3rd arg), then set total to current + next (2nd arg).  This check and exchange pair is atomic (and thus thread-safe). This works if total is the same as our snapshot in current, but the problem, is what happens if they aren’t the same?  Well, we know that in either case we will get the previous value of total (before the exchange), back as a result.  Thus, we can test this against our snapshot to see if it was the value we expected: 1: // if the value returned is != current, then our snapshot must be out of date 2: // which means we didn't (and shouldn't) apply current + next 3: if (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref total, current + next, current) != current) 4: { 5: // ooops, total was not equal to our snapshot in current, what should we do??? 6: } So what do we do if we fail?  That’s up to you and the problem you are trying to solve.  It’s possible you would decide to abort the whole transaction, or perhaps do a lightweight spin and try again.  Let’s try that: 1: double current = total; 2:  3: // make first attempt... 4: if (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref total, current + i, current) != current) 5: { 6: // if we fail, go into a spin wait, spin, and try again until succeed 7: var spinner = new SpinWait(); 8:  9: do 10: { 11: spinner.SpinOnce(); 12: current = total; 13: } 14: while (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref total, current + i, current) != current); 15: } 16:  This is not trivial code, but it illustrates a possible use of CompareExchange().  What we are doing is first checking to see if we succeed on the first try, and if so great!  If not, we create a SpinWait and then repeat the process of SpinOnce(), grab a fresh snapshot, and repeat until CompareExchnage() succeeds.  You may wonder why not a simple do-while here, and the reason it’s more efficient to only create the SpinWait until we absolutely know we need one, for optimal efficiency. Though not as simple (or maintainable) as a simple lock, this will perform better in many situations.  Comparing an unlocked (and wrong) version, a version using lock, and the Interlocked of the code, we get the following average times for multiple iterations of adding the sum of 100,000 numbers: 1: Unlocked money average time: 2.1 ms 2: Locked money average time: 5.1 ms 3: Interlocked money average time: 3 ms So the Interlocked.CompareExchange(), while heavier to code, came in lighter than the lock, offering a good compromise of safety and performance when we need to reduce contention. CompareExchange() - it’s not just for adding stuff… So that was one simple use of CompareExchange() in the context of adding double values -- which meant we couldn’t have used the simpler Interlocked.Add() -- but it has other uses as well. If you think about it, this really works anytime you want to create something new based on a current value without using a full lock.  For example, you could use it to create a simple lazy instantiation implementation.  In this case, we want to set the lazy instance only if the previous value was null: 1: public static class Lazy<T> where T : class, new() 2: { 3: private static T _instance; 4:  5: public static T Instance 6: { 7: get 8: { 9: // if current is null, we need to create new instance 10: if (_instance == null) 11: { 12: // attempt create, it will only set if previous was null 13: Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref _instance, new T(), (T)null); 14: } 15:  16: return _instance; 17: } 18: } 19: } So, if _instance == null, this will create a new T() and attempt to exchange it with _instance.  If _instance is not null, then it does nothing and we discard the new T() we created. This is a way to create lazy instances of a type where we are more concerned about locking overhead than creating an accidental duplicate which is not used.  In fact, the BCL implementation of Lazy<T> offers a similar thread-safety choice for Publication thread safety, where it will not guarantee only one instance was created, but it will guarantee that all readers get the same instance.  Another possible use would be in concurrent collections.  Let’s say, for example, that you are creating your own brand new super stack that uses a linked list paradigm and is “lock free”.  We could use Interlocked.CompareExchange() to be able to do a lockless Push() which could be more efficient in multi-threaded applications where several threads are pushing and popping on the stack concurrently. Yes, there are already concurrent collections in the BCL (in .NET 4.0 as part of the TPL), but it’s a fun exercise!  So let’s assume we have a node like this: 1: public sealed class Node<T> 2: { 3: // the data for this node 4: public T Data { get; set; } 5:  6: // the link to the next instance 7: internal Node<T> Next { get; set; } 8: } Then, perhaps, our stack’s Push() operation might look something like: 1: public sealed class SuperStack<T> 2: { 3: private volatile T _head; 4:  5: public void Push(T value) 6: { 7: var newNode = new Node<int> { Data = value, Next = _head }; 8:  9: if (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref _head, newNode, newNode.Next) != newNode.Next) 10: { 11: var spinner = new SpinWait(); 12:  13: do 14: { 15: spinner.SpinOnce(); 16: newNode.Next = _head; 17: } 18: while (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref _head, newNode, newNode.Next) != newNode.Next); 19: } 20: } 21:  22: // ... 23: } Notice a similar paradigm here as with adding our doubles before.  What we are doing is creating the new Node with the data to push, and with a Next value being the original node referenced by _head.  This will create our stack behavior (LIFO – Last In, First Out).  Now, we have to set _head to now refer to the newNode, but we must first make sure it hasn’t changed! So we check to see if _head has the same value we saved in our snapshot as newNode.Next, and if so, we set _head to newNode.  This is all done atomically, and the result is _head’s original value, as long as the original value was what we assumed it was with newNode.Next, then we are good and we set it without a lock!  If not, we SpinWait and try again. Once again, this is much lighter than locking in highly parallelized code with lots of contention.  If I compare the method above with a similar class using lock, I get the following results for pushing 100,000 items: 1: Locked SuperStack average time: 6 ms 2: Interlocked SuperStack average time: 4.5 ms So, once again, we can get more efficient than a lock, though there is the cost of added code complexity.  Fortunately for you, most of the concurrent collection you’d ever need are already created for you in the System.Collections.Concurrent (here) namespace – for more information, see my Little Wonders – The Concurent Collections Part 1 (here), Part 2 (here), and Part 3 (here). Summary We’ve seen before how the Interlocked class can be used to safely and efficiently add, increment, decrement, read, and exchange values in a multi-threaded environment.  In addition to these, Interlocked CompareExchange() can be used to perform more complex logic without the need of a lock when lock contention is a concern. The added efficiency, though, comes at the cost of more complex code.  As such, the standard lock is often sufficient for most thread-safety needs.  But if profiling indicates you spend a lot of time waiting for locks, or if you just need a lock for something simple such as an increment, decrement, read, exchange, etc., then consider using the Interlocked class’s methods to reduce wait. Technorati Tags: C#,CSharp,.NET,Little Wonders,Interlocked,CompareExchange,threading,concurrency

    Read the article

  • Host website without domain name?

    - by Frost Shadow
    I have an old desktop sitting around I wanted to try making a server out of, but I don't want to pay to register a Domain Name. Is there a way I can host a website without a domain name, or to register a domain name for free? If I can't host a web page without a domain name, can I just access the files on the server through the internet some how without a domain name? Thanks for any insight!

    Read the article

  • android unlock screen intent?

    - by John
    Is there an intent that is fired when a user unlocks their screen? I want my app to adjust the brightness when the screen turns on, but the problem im running into is that the screen on intent is fired on the lock screen and it does not adjust the display on that screen.

    Read the article

  • If I'm updating a DataRow, do I lock the entire DataTable or just the DataRow?

    - by Dan Tao
    Suppose I'm accessing a DataTable from multiple threads. If I want to access a particular row, I suspect I need to lock that operation (I could be mistaken about this, but at least I know this way I'm safe): // this is a strongly-typed table OrdersRow row = null; lock (orderTable.Rows.SyncRoot) { row = orderTable.FindByOrderId(myOrderId); } But then, if I want to update that row, should I lock the table (or rather, the table's Rows.SyncRoot object) again, or can I simply lock the row?

    Read the article

  • Understanding CLR 2.0 Memory Model

    - by Eloff
    Joe Duffy, gives 6 rules that describe the CLR 2.0+ memory model (it's actual implementation, not any ECMA standard) I'm writing down my attempt at figuring this out, mostly as a way of rubber ducking, but if I make a mistake in my logic, at least someone here will be able to catch it before it causes me grief. Rule 1: Data dependence among loads and stores is never violated. Rule 2: All stores have release semantics, i.e. no load or store may move after one. Rule 3: All volatile loads are acquire, i.e. no load or store may move before one. Rule 4: No loads and stores may ever cross a full-barrier (e.g. Thread.MemoryBarrier, lock acquire, Interlocked.Exchange, Interlocked.CompareExchange, etc.). Rule 5: Loads and stores to the heap may never be introduced. Rule 6: Loads and stores may only be deleted when coalescing adjacent loads and stores from/to the same location. I'm attempting to understand these rules. x = y y = 0 // Cannot move before the previous line according to Rule 1. x = y z = 0 // equates to this sequence of loads and stores before possible re-ordering load y store x load 0 store z Looking at this, it appears that the load 0 can be moved up to before load y, but the stores may not be re-ordered at all. Therefore, if a thread sees z == 0, then it also will see x == y. If y was volatile, then load 0 could not move before load y, otherwise it may. Volatile stores don't seem to have any special properties, no stores can be re-ordered with respect to each other (which is a very strong guarantee!) Full barriers are like a line in the sand which loads and stores can not be moved over. No idea what rule 5 means. I guess rule 6 means if you do: x = y x = z Then it is possible for the CLR to delete both the load to y and the first store to x. x = y z = y // equates to this sequence of loads and stores before possible re-ordering load y store x load y store z // could be re-ordered like this load y load y store x store z // rule 6 applied means this is possible? load y store x // but don't pop y from stack (or first duplicate item on top of stack) store z What if y was volatile? I don't see anything in the rules that prohibits the above optimization from being carried out. This does not violate double-checked locking, because the lock() between the two identical conditions prevents the loads from being moved into adjacent positions, and according to rule 6, that's the only time they can be eliminated. So I think I understand all but rule 5, here. Anyone want to enlighten me (or correct me or add something to any of the above?)

    Read the article

  • How to lock files in a tomcat web application?

    - by yankee
    The Java manual says: The locks held on a particular file by a single Java virtual machine do not overlap. The overlaps method may be used to test whether a candidate lock range overlaps an existing lock. I guess that if I lock a file in a tomcat web application I can't be sure that every call to this application is done by a different JVM, can I? So how can I lock files within my tomcat application in a reliable way?

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Office document is "locked for editing by 'another user'"

    - by Chris
    A few of my users are in and out of various Excel 2007 spreadsheets all day. One of them reports that "50% of the time" she tries to open a spreadsheet from the file server, an information message comes up stating: foo.xlsx is locked for editing by 'another user'. Open "Read-Only" or click "Notify" to open read-only and receive notification when the document is no longer in use. Nine times out of ten the document is not open by another user. My users immediately try to open the same document again, and it works. I imagine this is caused by Excel leaving owner files on the server, but I do not know why. An added clue: When one of my users selects "Notify," a dialog pops up in a moment informing them the file is available for them to edit. Any guidance on how to solve this issue and make my users' days flow better?

    Read the article

  • Typing numbers on a MacBook Pro with AZERTY keyboard with Caps Lock — possible?

    - by Mathias Bynens
    I have a Belgian AZERTY keyboard on my MacBook Pro. Sadly, it appears to be impossible to use Caps Lock to type numbers — I still need to hold Shift for every number I want to type. Is it possible to change the Caps Lock key’s function to Shift Lock so that it affects the whole keyboard rather than just the letters? I’d like to be able to type numbers without holding Shift.

    Read the article

  • copy windows registry and/or other locked files

    - by karolrvn
    Hi. While improving my (personal) backup system, I noticed, that I cannot copy certain locked files, like the windows registry files. Is there a way to copy such things? Or a specific solution for the registry (I know of the regedit-File-Export ,,solution'' but this is to text format and seems slow). AFAIK, On Linux the locking system is advisory and on Windows it is mandatory. Can I somehow bypass the mandatory-ness for backup purposes etc.? TIA.

    Read the article

  • Free or Open Solution for Storing and Charting CSV data

    - by rrrfusco
    I'm presently storing CSV files, combining them, opening them in open office, creating pivot tables and then generating charts from the spreadsheet. I've looked at OOBase, but appending csv files to base is clunky for some reason. SQLite seems like a good database solution, but I've haven't found a good charting program that connects to it with ease. Although open office (or libreoffice) maintains the references and allows you to update the information, this process is far from efficient. There are too many steps and it seems one program should handle all of these tasks. A better program would be more intuitive, allow you to simply add inserts into a database, and include an interface for standard charting settings. EDIT Simplest Automated Analysis and Chart Generation Tool? The above answer references Spotfire and Tableau, each of which has a free 14 and 30 day trial. Each program is nicely streamlined and designed. I'm looking for a program between this quality and LibreOffice. Can you recommend a better open or free desktop solution for windows?

    Read the article

  • Erase just the free space on my hard drive

    - by Patriot
    I'm about to give away an older computer with just the Windows XP operating system intact and all other programs uninstalled. However, upon peeking at the "free space" with software called "Recuva", I notice lots of deleted things that could be recoverable. Some of these include sensitive data files, pdfs, and other personal items that I would not want retrieved. I ran a program called "Eraser" to try and overwrite that data, but it failed to do an adequate job. I also tried to do the job with "Glary Utilities" but it failed too. Short of installing a new, very cheap hard drive and re-installing the bare bones operating system, I'm out of ideas. EDIT - WOW!!! I was not really expecting this many GREAT ideas. My next question is this. If I go the DBAN route and truely wipe the hard drive, then restore my disc image (I use Acronis True Image) will it also restore the free space data? Does imaging just copy readable data? I have an old image of when the OS was first installed.

    Read the article

  • Can I switch input methods while Caps Lock is being held down on Windows?

    - by Syzygy
    On my Linux computer, my keyboard switches from English to Serbian when I hold the Caps Lock key. For example, to write c all I have to do is hold Caps Lock, and press the key where c is on the Serbian keyboard (in this case, they key is ; on the English keyboard). When I release Caps Lock, the keyboard "switches back" to English, so that if I press ; I get ; as desired. Super useful. Please note that I know how to change the keyboard layout. I want to use Caps Lock as a modifier key to change the language only while being held down! Is there a way to replicate this behavior on Windows 7 or Windows 8?

    Read the article

  • How can I unlock a folder locked by ‘System’ process on Windows Server 2008?

    - by ripper234
    I'm on Windows Server 2008 64-bit. LockHunter identifies that a folder is locked by the "System" process. I'm not sure why this happens, but my bigger concern is how to unlock it. I'm looking for a solution that can be run from the command line. LockHunter itself is unable to unlock it. Also, Sysinternals' Process Explorer doesn't find the locked folder's handle. Rebooting is not an option either.

    Read the article

  • Windows XP seemingly out of resources but plenty of free RAM and swap available

    - by Artem Russakovskii
    This one has been bothering me for years and so far I couldn't find an adequate solution. The problem occurs on pretty much every XP install I've done. After opening a variety of programs or the system running existing programs for a while, Windows seemingly runs out of resources, without telling me. There's ALWAYS free RAM. For example, it just happened to me and I had over a gig of free RAM. There are no viruses, spyware, or other nonsense - it is a Windows resource problem, but the question is which resource is it running out of, how does one pinpoint it, and how does one prevent it? Sometimes, this happens after running specific programs - for example, today it happened when I started Photoshop CS4 and Flash CS4 at the same time. I also noticed that restarting The Bat (email client by Ritlabs) seems to get rid of this problem for a while but again, this happens on machines that don't even have The Bat installed. So what does exactly happen? The symptoms are: pressing alt-tab doesn't bring up the list anymore - it just jumps to the next window instantly, very similar to the way Alt-Esc works, however in this case, it's due to not having enough resources to bring up the alt-tab menu random programs would randomly crash, citing random errors, out of memory errors, system resources, inabilities to do system calls, etc. random programs would start missing random parts - for example, Firefox top menus might disappear, pull up partial selections, or not pull up anymore altogether. IE might lose a few of its toolbars. Some programs might fail to redraw or would just plain go gray where the UI used to be. Windows itself never complains about running out of RAM, virtual memory, or anything at all, yet it's running out of something. The only clue I was able to find and apply the fix today was this Desktop Heap Limitation. I haven't confirmed the fix working as not enough time passed. In the meantime, what are everyone's thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Oracle account locked

    - by Priya
    Hi All, I had a user in my oracle DB with some 'x' password for sometime. Without notifying my team I changed the password to 'y'. But my team members tried to connect to the machine with the old passowrd 'x' and as the limit was set, the user account got locked. I know how to set the resource limit for the login. It would be helpful if anyone can help in finding who and all has tried to connect to the DB. As a administrator I would like to view from where the connection was from. Thanks in advance. Priya.R

    Read the article

  • Windows XP: How to delete files and folders that cannot be deleted?

    - by glenneroo
    I have a backup copy of a previous Windows' Documents and Settings folder which only contains my original user and within 2 more directories: Favorites and Local Settings. When I try to delete Local Settings I get this error: When I try to delete Favorites, I get this error: I ran this in a cmd shell: attrib *.* -r -a -s -h /s ...but it did not help, nor did it return any errors/warnings. I used Unlocker v1.8.5 and LockHunter repeatedly at multiple levels to see if any files are in use, but both always say: No Files Locked. Update #1: I was able to rename the directory, which now gives me this warning before (trying to) delete: If I press Yes (or Yes to All) then I get this error: Update #2: I let chkdsk /f run which required a reboot since it's on my primary system partition. During Stage 2 scanning, I received about 40 of these: Deleting an index entry from index $0 of file 25. ...followed by: Deleting index entry cookies in index $I30 of file 37576. ...but I still get the first error dialog above when trying to delete. Update #3: Digging deeper, the 99 is the name of one of many directories located deep in here: C:\Documents and Settings.OLD\User\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Messenger\[email protected]\SharingMetadata\[email protected]\DFSR\Staging\CS{D4E4AE55-B5E2-F03B-5189-6C4DA6E41788}\ Inside each of those directories were files with names such as: 2300-{C93D01AC-0739-4FD9-88C7-13D2F21A208E}-v2300-{C93D01AC-0739-4FD9-88C7-13D2F21A208E}-v2300-Downloaded.frx I noticed that, unlike all the directories, I couldn't rename any of these files. I also noticed that the file + dir names were extremely long: Original directory = 194 characters Filenames = 100+ characters Together the length exceeds the 255-char limit which is bad and would explain the error message I posted in Update #1. Partial Solution: Rename all directories until the total path length is less than 100. Afterwards I was able to rename the .frx files, not to mention delete everything inside the Local Settings directory. This is only a partial solution because this (empty) directory is still undeleteable: C:\1\2\Favorites\Wien\What To Do.. I'm guessing because of the ".." at the end, Windows (Explorer and cmd) can't deal with it: Here is what Explorer properties shows: Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How to delete files and folders that cannot be deleted?

    - by glenneroo
    I have a backup copy of a previous Windows' Documents and Settings folder which only contains my original user and within 2 more directories: Favorites and Local Settings. When I try to delete Local Settings I get this error: When I try to delete Favorites, I get this error: I ran this in a cmd shell: attrib *.* -r -a -s -h /s ...but it did not help, nor did it return any errors/warnings. I used Unlocker v1.8.5 and LockHunter repeatedly at multiple levels to see if any files are in use, but both always say: No Files Locked. Update #1: I was able to rename the directory, which now gives me this warning before (trying to) delete: If I press Yes (or Yes to All) then I get this error: Update #2: I let chkdsk /f run which required a reboot since it's on my primary system partition. During Stage 2 scanning, I received about 40 of these: Deleting an index entry from index $0 of file 25. ...followed by: Deleting index entry cookies in index $I30 of file 37576. ...but I still get the first error dialog above when trying to delete. I ran chkdsk again, this time: chkdsk /f /r. Produced no messages. Same result when deleting. Update #3: Digging deeper, the 99 is the name of one of many directories located deep in here: C:\Documents and Settings.OLD\User\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Messenger\[email protected]\SharingMetadata\[email protected]\DFSR\Staging\CS{D4E4AE55-B5E2-F03B-5189-6C4DA6E41788}\ Inside each of those directories were files with names such as: 2300-{C93D01AC-0739-4FD9-88C7-13D2F21A208E}-v2300-{C93D01AC-0739-4FD9-88C7-13D2F21A208E}-v2300-Downloaded.frx I noticed that, unlike all the directories, I couldn't rename any of these files. I also noticed that the file + dir names were extremely long: Original directory = 194 characters Filenames = 100+ characters Together the length exceeds the 255-char limit which is bad and would explain the error message I posted in Update #1. Partial Solution: Rename all directories until the total path length is less than 100. Afterwards I was able to rename the .frx files, not to mention delete everything inside the Local Settings directory. This is only a partial solution because these (empty) directories are still not deleteable, C:\1\2\Favorites\Wien\What To Do.. C:\1\2\Favorites\Photography\FIRE Same error as above: Here is what Explorer properties shows for both folders: Update #4 (another partial solution): Using harrymc's answer combined with thoroughly reading through this amazing MS-KB article which contains nearly everyone's idea and then some, inconspicuously titled: You cannot delete a file or a folder on an NTFS file system volume. I was able to delete the 2nd folder C:\1\2\Favorites\Photography\FIRE - the problem being that there was an invisible trailing space at the end. I got lucky when I did an auto-complete whilst playing around with the del "\\?\<path>" command which he suggested. NOTE: A normal del did NOT work, nor did deleting from explorer. Now all that is left is the first directory C:\1\2\Favorites\Wien\What To Do.. (yes I tried endlessly with multiple combinations of the above solution ;) Keep 'em coming! =)

    Read the article

  • File Locked on Flash Drive

    - by AtomFury
    I'm completely frustrated. I'm an owner of a OCZ 8GB Rally2 which I've used flawlessly for about 4 months now, and all of a sudden this week I begin getting errors telling me that I can't delete a file due to "make sure the disk is not write-protected, full or and the file is not in-use" dialog. Here's what I've tried: Deleting the file using FileASSASSIN (it's worked on everything else but files on this darn flash drive) Formatting the flash drive and then restoring the backed up information (I format to NTFS, FYI) Any suggestions on what to do?

    Read the article

  • incorrect password when computer is locked

    - by cyntaxx
    Hi there, I have running a Windows XP SP3 Machine and I can't login after I have locked my Workstation. I changed my password and installed last Updates from Microsoft last Friday. When Windows comes up, there is no problem to login. But after I locked it, it tells me that my password is wrong. I pushed the client again into the domain, but doesn't help. Thanks, cyntaxx

    Read the article

  • How to show "switch user" screen after Windows-L?

    - by tputkonen
    When one locks the PC using Windows-L it activates a screen which shows account name and the text 'Locked'. There is also a "Switch User" button which open user selection screen. What I would like to, is show directly the user selection screen when one locks the PC. This was easy to do with XP but how can it be achieved on Seven?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >