|
|
2 questions down please
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
btw, its not usually a good idea to repost a question unless it has dissapeared off the page.
Ista wrote:
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work.
lol, thats great
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Newman wrote:
btw, its not usually a good idea to repost a question unless it has dissapeared off the page.
Well if no one answers it for 4 or 5 days I dont see what it hurts.
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, take a look below. 
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it that the Windows Task Manager seems to always show "Total Memory Usage" as the sum of all the running process's "Peak Memory Usage"?
This doesnt make sense, since the "Peak Memory Usage" of a process may represent memory that has already been freed (i.e. test.exe's "Peak Memory Usage" is 10MB but currently it is only using 1MB - if this were the only application currently running, Task Manager would show "Total Memory Usage" as 10MB - it should be 1MB, since 9MB has been freed)
Am I missing something?
60% of statistics are made up on the spot
|
|
|
|
|
dont forget when windows shuffles the process even though it shows 1MB its still using 10MB. And therefore even though 1MB is being used 10 should still be calculated because when the process becomes active again ( designated by the current OS ) it will be 10MB or how much is needed to continue processing the current process.
Find some articles on how windows manages the processes life cycle.
Plus, Peak Memory Usage means a peak. Not exact at that moment just over an interval chosen. Or so you would think. For more info on that See Spock on Star Trek encyclopedia.
This is from a devlopers point of view, I'm sure an admin would have more to say.
nick
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Not really sure, perhaps because many programs expand to take up more memory and fail to let go of it again later? (*cough* MSWord *cough*)
Seriously though, it doesn't seemto be that way on my machine, the "Mem Usage" which shows the total amount currently in use is going up and down as my machine runs. Not just when I open or close programs either, when I close one of three web pages I have open it goes down even though the browser does not actually unload.
What OS are you using? (Win2k here)
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Okay so the contract admin gave me terminal server install on my client so I can administrate the new .net server. And its called Remote Desktop Connection. So is this the new name.
nick
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Remote Desktop is adminstration only, its limited to like 2 (not sure) connections. 2003 Server System has terminal services, but it requires licensing per user or per device etc. Remote Desktop is limited to 1 connection on XP Pro.
Remote Desktop is base on Terminal Services, but it has restrictions on how many simultaneous connections etc and is intended for adminstration.
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
Close, but there is more to it than that. See my post below.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Remote Desktop Connection is the name of the newer Terminal Services Client.
The protocol used by Terminal Services is called RDP, (Remote Desktop Protocol), and always has been. The server is called Terminal Services in Win2K. I haven't looked at it on Win2k3 yet, they may have changed the name there. Many of us refer to the newer client as the "XP Terminal Services Client" because it made its first appearance with WinXP, but that is not really its proper name.
Specifically the new client is the RDP5 client, supporting version 5 of the protocol. This client is compatible with nearly all versions of Windows and can be used to access all versions of Terminal Services.
The Terminal Services server software included with Win2k can be installed in two different modes, "Remote Administration" mode allows only 2 connections and only members of the administrators group can log on, "Application" mode allows as many connections as the hardware will handle and regular users can log on though they do still have to have permission to the server in question.
WinXP allows one user to "take over" the desktop remotely using the RDP5 client. When this is happening, the screen on the client workstation locks itself and if you break the lock by logging in the remote session will be disconnected. There is only one "desktop" during this, not several independent desktop sessions like you get with full Terminal Services.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
?
If I have services running through com+ and someone logs in will it log them off and corrupt my services?
Also, what if Someone is at the pc using it when I log on to the pc. Will thier session be logged or can someone physically use it while I do with Remot desktop?
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Ista wrote:
If I have services running through com+ and someone logs in will it log them off and corrupt my services?
No, taking over the desktop will not end any programs/services/thingees. At least it hasn't happened to me yet. It basically just takes over the computer and instead of sending the desktop images to the screen on the machine it sends them to the controlling RDP client. When this is happening it shows a "This workstation has been locked" message on the controlled desktop.
Ista wrote:
Also, what if Someone is at the pc using it when I log on to the pc. Will thier session be logged or can someone physically use it while I do with Remot desktop?
Their session will not be logged off, you would just take it over. Also, they have to agree to let you take it over, you just can't jerk it away from them.
No they can not work at their desktop while you are controlling their XP machine. You will be the only one seeing their desktop while you have remote control.
All of this confusing crap about one login only applies to using Remote Desktop to work with an XP machine remotely. Not working from an XP machine, (or other compatible windows machine), to a windows server. When you are working with a windows server remotely, then someone could be working on the console, someone else could be working via the remote client, and you could be working via the remote client. All of this could be happening at the same time and your various sessions would not interact at all. Well, aside from stealing processor ticks and memory from each other.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
My setup is windows 2000 professional and I'm tagging a .net server 2003
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, OK. Then ignore all of the crap about one user at a time. It is irrelevant to your situation.
When connecting to a Terminal Services server from a client, (This is your situation), the server creates an independant login session for each user. This includes all of your own settings and desktop and such, just as though you had logged onto the server directly from the console. You can run programs, install things (in a limited manner), and generally fool around without messing with any other users who might be logged in.
Of course if you reboot the machine or something the other users will tend to get cross with you, but that probably goes without saying. 
One thing that is good to know, if you have programs running and close your client without logging off then your programs will sit in memory and continue to run until either you log back in and close them down or the server or server administrator resets your session. If you leave sessions running, you run the risk that they will be reset on you. This does not perform a graceful shutdown on your programs, it is more like hitting the reset button on your computer right in the middle of typeing a sentence. Basically it is safest to just get in the habit of always closing your Remote Desktop session by logging out of the computer you are connected too. That way you never have to worry about things like forced resets or rogue sessions.
Anything else you want to know?
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
No youve done an excellent job and now I fully understand. But one thing you mentioned Terminal Services where as he installed Remote Desktop. In my situation is that identical?
I'm trying to learn so I know exactly what needs to be done.
thanks,
Nick
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Ista wrote:
one thing you mentioned Terminal Services where as he installed Remote Desktop. In my situation is that identical?
In your situation that is identical. The server is a "Terminal Services" server. Your client is a "Terminal Services" client that is now called "Remote Desktop Connection", probably because Microsoft likes us to be confused.
I actually expected them to rename "Terminal Services" server to "Remote Desktop" server in Win2003, but according to Matt they haven't. *shrug*
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Jystad wrote:
I haven't looked at it on Win2k3 yet, they may have changed the name there.
Its still Terminal Services
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
Cool, they didn't invalidate all of my hard won Win2k knowledge.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Jystad wrote:
Cool, they didn't invalidate all of my hard won Win2k knowledge.
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
I have to print the text directly to the printer. If i share this usb printer on the network and do the following in my prog:
hP = CreateFile("\\mycomp\hpusbprn", ...);
WriteFile(hP, "aaa",...);
(where "mycomp" -- network name of my computer, "hpusbprn" - network name of the printer) it works fine -- printer prints "aaa" emulating text mode. How to make the string with the name of printer for "CreateFile" buf without sharing printer?
konst
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone here have problem with Windows 2000's Fonts after installing SP4?!
It was working fine since I installed SP4 for my Win 2000 machine!
Always,
Hovik.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, none that I have noticed so far. I am still in controlled depolyment of SP4, but I have 6 servers running it and about 30 workstations and so far no funny business.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
My mate has a puzzling problem, that I wonder if anyone can help him with please....
He has a 2000Pro machine with an Epson Stylus Colour 900 printer with the latest drivers. When he boots his machine he always get two tiny windows appearing in the top right of the screen. Only the title bars appear, and they both have the title "explrr printer spooler". They do not dissapear and he has to close them himself.
Anyone know what's causing this and how to stop it please?
By googling I found someone thinks it may be a torjan virus. Any thoughts
Ta for any help at all.
I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe
Jeremy Davis
http://www.astad.org
http://www.jvf.co.uk
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
