|
Hi Roger,
thanks for replying - as luck would have it I've been out of action since posting due to the dreaded lurgy getting me - ugh. Nasty one doing the rounds....
Actually it was relatively easy in the end: the solution was to create a new application pool and have it run under that, rather than relying on the default one.
cheers
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
hi every one
i want copy data from memory.is it possible ?
there are many tools for dumping process from memory but i want dump data from memory.
for example i want dump Stream of one pdf or doc file from memory . is it possible?
plz introduce me tool or articles about it.
thanks a lot
|
|
|
|
|
HxD[^] allows you to view, edit and save the memory of running processes.
Don't expect to be able to easily dump files out of active memory though. What it will show you is the raw hex values in memory. It will be very difficult to figure out what it all means unless you know exactly what you are looking for.
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
I am using Windows XP SP2 machines.
I have a doubt regarding the current firewall profile (Domain/Standard) used by the computer.
My computer is connected to a domain based network. And my firewall settings shows that "your computer is using the domain settings".
When i disconnect the computer from network the firewall settings shows "your computer is using the non-domain settings".
But in another machine (WindowsXP SP2) always (when network available or not available) shows "Your computer is using the domain settings" (Clue : in this machine i ran the Network Location Awareness service manually. this service was in disabled state)
My question is, depending on what all conditions these display (using your domain/non-domain settings) changes.
Regards,
Krishnakumar
|
|
|
|
|
It's a setting in Group Policies, Administrative Templates\System\Group Policy\Group Policy slow link detection
Default setting is 500kb/s.
The speed is measured by sending two pings to the server, one with and one without payload, and then the time difference between them is measured.
Note that if you disable ICMP on your network, then Group Policy processing will fail.
|
|
|
|
|
Dear All,
Am running windows vista enter. 32 bit on my machine.
When i use the turn-off short key (Alt F4), the shutdown window appears and the first option in the drop down list is " Sleep ".
I want to change the order of these commands, like: i want the first option to be LogOff.
Any Help.
Best regards,
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know if it can be done. these were my original instructions until i saw that the log off item wasn't available.
on your bottom right screen, click on the battery icon. (get it by: clicking the start, right click anywhere on there, and choose "properties", choose the tab page "Notification Area", and check the "Power" checkbox and click "apply"). Then click "More power options" and with your current power setting, click "Change plan settings", "Change advanced power settings". in the tree view, open "Power buttons and lid", "Start menu power button", and then change the value of "Sleep" to log off
|
|
|
|
|
|
I actually had to do this for myself! I have no idea why... but sometimes I accidently drag a folder into another folder. It doesn't happen very often but its extremely annoying. I adjusted the sensitivity by changing the following registry keys:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop\DragHeight
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop\DragWidth
I didn't disable them, I only adjusted it so it wouldn't be so damn sensitive. You can set the value to a very large number. I believe the unit is in pixels.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you David for your reply, I haven't try it yet, I will try and let you know the result.
What about file/folder rename? is there any way to disable it?
Thanks.
ThaScorpion
|
|
|
|
|
If you are using NTFS you could set the parent folder's ACL so that he is only allowed to read the folders, not change it. This should prevent him of renaming any subfolders.
Dust Signs
The number you dialed is imaginary. Please turn your phone by 90 degrees and try again
|
|
|
|
|
A tweak to one of microsofts default settings for the USB drive can speed up the xp operating system.The xp default setting for the microprocessor 's polling [checking] of the usb drive for new hardware that may have been connected to the computer; is 1 millisecond ,which I think is a significant loading of the processor's time sharing for each cycle of its operating frequency;especially
when such a time consuming setting is so unnecessary for that particular function.
The O'Reilly Cookbook for XP suggests that the value be set at 1 second;which
I think could be set at at a higher value than that;without causing to much of an inconvenience.Since a computer takes a couple of seconds or longer when you are switching from one folder or program to another on the computer; I prefer to have the polling parameter set at least at 5 or 10 seconds;then the processor is not using any extra time polling the usb drive each time that you make an entry on the keyboard.I have my polling set at 30 seconds.
If someone is using a computer as a server; then that 1 millisecond default setting is obviously a huge and unnecessary time comsuming tax on all the read/write operations that are constantly being performed by the computer.
When I was browsing some of the 1000 pages of xp archives on the techrepublic.com site;I saw the polling tweak .
Microsoft not only hid that default setting inside the operating system but has also done a good job of hiding the setting from many of the internet sites that have tweaks for xp.
The path to modify the usb polling setting is: HKLM > System > CurrentControlSet > Class > 36fc9e60-c465-11cf-8056-444553540000
You will know if you have the right key if you see one of the default values on the right side of the screen that says "universal serial bus controllers".
Then select one of the sub keys that are listed on the left side of the screen[the highest numbers are usally the active usb controllers]; and create a new DWORD called " IdleEnable "; minus the quotation marks; and then give it a value such as 1 as Oreilly suggested .The computer will automatically recognize the number as being in seconds.
Then reboot the computer to make sure that the new polling value gets
processed by the computer.
winch1020
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Winchell wrote: The computer will automatically recognize the number as being in seconds
I believe that it increases the controller polling in increments of milliseconds rather than seconds. The article does not explicitly apply to Windows XP but the underlying functionality should be same in XP.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/297045[^]
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
I am going to change the "30" value that I entered into the "EnableIdle " DWORD; to 30000 which would be recognized as 30000 milliseconds by the computer which would be equal to 30 seconds if you are correct ;which you probably are; as I know that there are other time related entries in the regedit that for example,the computer "timeout" setting for unresponsive programs is around the 20000 or 30000 value.
I thought that maybe when a new Dword is created that possibly the XP operating system would recognize it in seconds instead of milliseconds as are the Dwords that are already apart of the xp; since Oreilly did not specify one way or the other.
When I reboot my computer after changing the Dword value to 30000 ;I will take a look at the several USB thumb drives that are connected to the usb drive to see if the lights in them start flashing within a minute ;which would indicate that they had been polled.
I will also look for any increase in speed performance although my computer is already very fast.I also did the "priority control" tweak in the regedit that is suggested by the Kadaitcha.cx internet site.
One other benefit of significantly increasing the usb polling number is that it will help to keep the computer stable as all the 1 millisecond increments will be replaced by a pause or null value which would be more like a "refresh" or "reload"attribute if my logic is correct.
winch1020
|
|
|
|
|
To be honest I would leave the setting exactly as Microsoft had it. I don't understand why you think this value will give you any performance boost. The amount of time it takes to query the USB host controller can be measured in nanoseconds which is to say billionths of a second. I cannot argue that there will be zero performance gain, but any gain will be infinitesimally small.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
I am just using my computer for surfing the internet; and I guess the computer circuit is not being swamped with a backlog of data that requires processing
and I also am not running any programs that require alot of processing such as video games or movies that would more quickly utilize all the system resources
that are available in the computer;so every speed tweak is of less significance for my computer ;I suppose.
The ram memory clock speeds are alot slower than the microprocessor speeds.For example,the microprocessor is 1.79 gighz and the ram memory is about 400 mghz as the bios spec says the "system bus speed" is 400 mghz in the computer that I am using.
If I can stream line the xp operating system processing requirements without compromising or undermining any of the other operating system parameters ;
then I prefer to customize it especially if it is a simple setting adjustment.
Whenever I do a re-installing of the xp imcluding formatting; I always notice a general increase in the speed performance of the computer after I have done a few of the xp performance tweaks that I have read about in computer magazines or on the internet.
winch1020
|
|
|
|
|
On second thought, I think that O'reilly was correct when he implied that the "IdleEnable" would register the number in seconds;because when I first did the tweak several weeks ago,I now remember that I checked a few times for flashing usb thumb drives ;by plugging in the thumb drives [on a usb drive hub] after the computer had booted up after I had entered a number value of 20 into the newly created Dword called "IdleEnable".
And the usb thumb drives did not start flashing until about 15 to 20 seconds after I had plugged them into the computer.And I also checked the time a few more times in the following few days with the same result.
But now; I am unable to customize the setting with my own chosen values;as the usb thumb lights seem to automatically start flashing about 3 or 4 seconds after I connect them to the usb drive;whether I try values of;for example of 60 or 60000.
I think I know the reason why.
About a week ago I downloaded the newest bios version[A02] from the Dell internet site and then I decided to uninstall it because of some modifications I did not like that had been done to the xp operating system.
So I downloaded the original bios version [AO1] that my computer had come with.But the Dell techs tell me that the AO1 version that is on the internet had also had an update ,which I could tell because one of the AO2 modifications was on it - "the microsoft management console".
The bios updates are done by the Dell engineers;so the Dell techs tell me.
So I am speculating that the DEll engineers also included a change to the usb drive polling default setting of 1 millisecond and increased it to a value of about 3 or 4 second;and I am unable to change that value by creating the IdleEnable Dword.
I would like to get the original AO1 bios version that does not have the "microsof management console" in it and I would not mind having the option of setting my own usb drive polling value; although the 3 or 4 second value setting is a significant improvement over the 1 millisecond default setting.
But that 3 or 4 second delay does not necessarily mean that that the default setting has been increased to 3 or 4 seconds because there was always a couple of seconds delay when first plugging the usb thumb drives into the usb drives;and this is going back several months ago.
Because of a couple of NEGATIVE REGEDIT DELETES that were done in the regedit of the AO2 bios; I am now SUSPICIOUS that one of the Dell engineers has now REMOVED THE OPTION of being able to change the 1 MILLISECOND DEFAULT setting of the usb drive polling by creating the new Dword called "IdleEnable.
winch1020
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am trying to use WinPcap (A packet sniffer) with my laptop using a wireless connection seems like this type of adapter (wireless) is not supported by The WinPcap product
On thier FAQ page they ( the WinPcap people ) mention in order to get around the problem of Unsupported Adapters
you can try a NetWork Bridge using Adapter on the Computer you are trying to Form a Network Bridge with
Seems like from the tutorial On Windows you would 2 NetWork connections on the LapTop to get a NetWok Bridge
Would any have any info a how to go about this Meaning form a bridge connection between a WireLess Adapter on
the Laptop and a Tower connected to a router
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users/200612/msg00157.html
Please keep me informed.
I am trying to learn this also without installing Linux or buying a CACE AIRPCAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem I was having that I need to run My Program as a Adminstrator when I migrated
to VISTA once done the packet sniffer worked and my TCP/IP programs took off
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, my server is running with a partition that contain 200Gb of disk space with 190Gb of data. I found that the partition is dirty so I need to scan disk. But I'm not sure how long should it take. The scan disk option will include fix error on disk and check for bad sector (here is the syntax chkdsk e: -r -f). Could anyone please let me know how long should it take for this scan disk process? Because I want to have a proper schedule to scan it without impact to the user. Thank in advance!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Only you can answer this question. We know nothing of the disk configuration, number of files and folders, system speed, processor specs, disk interface, ..., nothing. We still couldn't tell you, even if we did know this stuff. There's just no way to predict it.
You just have to do it once at night, see how long it takes, and schedule it appropriately.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: You just have to do it once at night, see how long it takes, and schedule it appropriately.
The problem that I face is the electricity for my office just avaialable only between 7am to 7pm from Monday through Friday only. So during most of this time, user need to connect to the server to work with the shared file, we only have two hours at lunch time but I don't think 2 hours will enough for me to scan disk. I post the question in here whether anyone know are there any tool design to calculate the estimate time for the scan disk process. Thank you for your comment!!!
|
|
|
|
|
No, there isn't any tool that will estimate this, because, like us, there's no way for it to predict what is happening during a scan and how fast it's going to go.
You also don't have to scan the disk every night, or every week. Once a month is good.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
and he has his profile and created the account as limited, he alwayd drags and drops everything and renames folders and files, and finally I get a messy groups of files and folders.
![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
