Search Results

Search found 91257 results on 3651 pages for 'should know better'.

Page 87/3651 | < Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >

  • How to know strong name of GWT serialization policy at the time of host page generation?

    - by Alexander Vasiljev
    There is an excellent article describing a way to embed GWT RPC payload into the host page. A key element is missing there is how to know Strong Name of RPC serialization policy at run time. Strong Name is computed at the compile time, put into the client and obfurscated. Strong name is sent to the server with RPC request as described here. What would you suggest to make this parameter available at the time of host page generation?

    Read the article

  • How to know about results of work with COM component?

    - by chester89
    I suppose this question is more general than working with COM components. I have a .NET client written in C# and COM component written in pure Win32 API. Client side uses this component to perform some actions. How to know on the client that component did its job? I think it may be socket/pipe, with component writing to it about results, and client reading from it displaying progress to the user. What is the best way to do this?

    Read the article

  • How do i know what unixtime a php session will expire?

    - by Steve
    Hi How do I know how many seconds it will be until a php session expires? I'm building a web application where users might spend a lot of time typing into big text fields, but for security reasons I still want sessions to time out after a reasonably short period. I want to warn them if their session is about to expire so they can save or take some other action to keep it alive. Any tips? thanks!

    Read the article

  • If I register a domain name using a service like A Small Orange, how can I know they are registering

    - by Sergio Tapia
    I have a great name for a website and it's available, but I don't really know how to register a domain name using a barebones website; that's why I want to use A Small Orange-like service. My question is, is it standard procedure to register the name on YOUR(the costumers) behalf, or do companies set it up on their name so they can profit from hits if in the future you stop paying for the hosting?

    Read the article

  • Python's asyncore to periodically send data using a variable timeout. Is there a better way?

    - by Nick Sonneveld
    I wanted to write a server that a client could connect to and receive periodic updates without having to poll. The problem I have experienced with asyncore is that if you do not return true when dispatcher.writable() is called, you have to wait until after the asyncore.loop has timed out (default is 30s). The two ways I have tried to work around this is 1) reduce timeout to a low value or 2) query connections for when they will next update and generate an adequate timeout value. However if you refer to 'Select Law' in 'man 2 select_tut', it states, "You should always try to use select() without a timeout." Is there a better way to do this? Twisted maybe? I wanted to try and avoid extra threads. I'll include the variable timeout example here: #!/usr/bin/python import time import socket import asyncore # in seconds UPDATE_PERIOD = 4.0 class Channel(asyncore.dispatcher): def __init__(self, sock, sck_map): asyncore.dispatcher.__init__(self, sock=sock, map=sck_map) self.last_update = 0.0 # should update immediately self.send_buf = '' self.recv_buf = '' def writable(self): return len(self.send_buf) > 0 def handle_write(self): nbytes = self.send(self.send_buf) self.send_buf = self.send_buf[nbytes:] def handle_read(self): print 'read' print 'recv:', self.recv(4096) def handle_close(self): print 'close' self.close() # added for variable timeout def update(self): if time.time() >= self.next_update(): self.send_buf += 'hello %f\n'%(time.time()) self.last_update = time.time() def next_update(self): return self.last_update + UPDATE_PERIOD class Server(asyncore.dispatcher): def __init__(self, port, sck_map): asyncore.dispatcher.__init__(self, map=sck_map) self.port = port self.sck_map = sck_map self.create_socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) self.bind( ("", port)) self.listen(16) print "listening on port", self.port def handle_accept(self): (conn, addr) = self.accept() Channel(sock=conn, sck_map=self.sck_map) # added for variable timeout def update(self): pass def next_update(self): return None sck_map = {} server = Server(9090, sck_map) while True: next_update = time.time() + 30.0 for c in sck_map.values(): c.update() # <-- fill write buffers n = c.next_update() #print 'n:',n if n is not None: next_update = min(next_update, n) _timeout = max(0.1, next_update - time.time()) asyncore.loop(timeout=_timeout, count=1, map=sck_map)

    Read the article

  • is there anyway to know if your supposedly fully dedicated server is really a virtually resource-sha

    - by siran
    Hi, sometimes I feel my server not responding as smoothly as I would expect (i have a Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz Quad Core), given that for example, the 'top' commands reports a low load < 0.5, CPU are almost completely idle ... I maybe have internet connectivity issues, so I don't really know if it's me or if it's the server itself. Is there anykind of benchmarking script (or something analogous) I could run and see the actual performance of the server ?

    Read the article

  • Do you know of a log4net appender which rolls on date, but let's you limit the total number of files

    - by Michal Drozdowicz
    Hi, I need to define an appender for log4net in a way that I get one log file for each day, but the total number of files are limited to, let's say, 30. That is I want to keep only the logs not older then 30 days, delete the older ones. I've tried doing it with RollingFileAppender, but it seems that specifying a limit of files to keep is not supported. Do you know of an alternative solution that I could use?

    Read the article

  • When is factory method better than simple factory and vice versa?

    - by Bruce
    Hi all Working my way through the Head First Design Patterns book. I believe I understand the simple factory and the factory method, but I'm having trouble seeing what advantages factory method brings over simple factory. If an object A uses a simple factory to create its B objects, then clients can create it like this: A a = new A(new BFactory()); whereas if an object uses a factory method, a client can create it like this: A a = new ConcreteA(); // ConcreteA contains a method for instantiating the same Bs that the BFactory above creates, with the method hardwired into the subclass of A, ConcreteA. So in the case of the simple factory, clients compose A with a B factory, whereas with the factory method, the client chooses the appropriate subclass for the types of B it wants. There really doesn't seem to be much to choose between them. Either you have to choose which BFactory you want to compose A with, or you have to choose the right subclass of A to give you the Bs. Under what circumstances is one better than the other? Thanks all!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >