I'm dealing with X application behaviors sometimes changing depending on the remote X server (particularly Windows-based ones like eXceed, Xming, FastX, and Cygwin-X). Is there any "simple" way to determine what the remote X server is?
Related
I'm writing a Qt/C++ application and i plan to add a network part with socket connection to a server implemented in Qt also.
If i host locally the server there is no real problem.
But if i want to share my application (client part) with some people and then be sure my server is always running, the best way would be to have a distant server.
Could you give me some clue to do it ? It's not still clear for me for steps to follow in this case.
Is it a better way for that ?
Can i find free hosting ?
Thanks a lot! :-)
There are generally 3 options:
1. Local hosting
This is server running at Your physical location. You can set it clearly as You want and the server will do whatever You want. But must be turned on the whole time, when there is no other work it will just consume power. Also You must get all the hardware (server components), software for running (Operation system), network device and connection (some router, which needs to have special set-up [NAT, port-forward, ...], speed and reachability of the internet connection) and most likely also some security device/SW (firewalls or so).
This is best idea for basic developement and testing. But once the service should work for public audience, it is not really worth to run server Yourself.
2. Remote hosting (virtualized or dedicated server)
This option was the top in last 20-30 years, where all the Web developers and App developers were putting their software on some prepared server. Dedicated is physical server running at some providers' location, who are lending You the hardware (and maybe some license for OS/other SW). Virtualized machine is just 1 hardware piece (server) with multiple virtual servers on it (more clients running on same hardware).
This got generally benefits as the networking/security/hardware issues are being carried out by the hosting owner. You are just borrowing some diskspace and computer time/performance. Normally the company will provide whole server, on which You can set up several services, run multiple protocols, etc..
Ideal solution for webs and single/few (not much) instances of server application(s).
3. Cloud hosting
This is the newest technology at the moment (alive around 10-15 years [eg. AWS running since 2006, Azure since 2010]). Datacenter owners (from 2. point) get better and created some applications on the servers, which will do all the work for You (mostly automatically). In few clicks the servers are running and application can be deployed, used database engines, web pages, IOT hubs, ... quite lot of stuff. Benefits are clearly that You just have to spent minimum of time to set up things and they will run. With high uptime (eg.: 99.9995%).
Difference between dedicated & cloud: On dedicated server there can be put almost any OS which fits the needs, run just services You want, have full control. In cloud solution, You don't have so much of "physical" control and the data moreless live somewhere in Datacenters all over the world. But generally it is more scalable solution and once Your app will be used by lot of users from public sector, this is best way to go.
Common ideology:
The most common solution is that when You develop, You create local server on which You deploy, test, improve. Once stable, order a server either on cloud or as dedicated/virtual machine and deploy it there. Some developers knows that their App will run on cloud services from the very beggining so they order it and start developing against it, but in most cases there is no need for that.
It is found that some BizTalk Receive Locations are disabled after server reboot (BizTalk server and SQL Server are separately installed to different physical servers)
Is there any idea on this scenario? Due to the boot sequence or other issues?
I will assume that, once you enable the receive locations manually, they are working correctly.
Typically, when FILE receive locations fail while pointing to an external server/share, it is because they are no longer available.
Make sure that, during the night, there are no network issues, planned/unplanned downtime of the share (= here your SQL server). A BizTalk receive location will retry to access a share for quite a while before disabling itself. Check the event log(s) for more information. You would want to look for errors/warnings there indicating an issue with connectivity between BizTalk and SQL.
Another issue might be that there are too many connections between your BizTalk server and SQL server. You can provide a maximum number of connections in the FILE share properties.
Also, you could try this link: https://serverfault.com/questions/235032/intermittent-connection-to-windows-7-shared-folder-from-windows-xp-workstations
It describes a potential fix for optimizing throughput for file sharing, although it depends on your operating system.
Is there a way to connect to and use X server without calling XOpenDisplay? For example, is it possible to use X rendering capabilities to render to a bitmap? Does all interaction must start with XOpenDisplay?
No, that's not possible. Asking an X server to do things for you necessarily requires talking to an X server.
You can create virtual X servers (connected to no video or input hardware, just rendering into memory) with the Xvfb X server.
If I'm going to develop a web application in ASP.NET using db4o what kind of database would it be: local or remote type, and why?
I think you mean "embedded" vs "client server" (those are the two basic modes that db4o can operate in.
You will most likely want "client server" so that you can spin up multiple client sessions (perhaps one per request?).
The decision as to where to put the database depends on your scenario. Ideally, you would architect your solution so that you could do it either way via configuration. The way you can service up db40 in process in the case of a single server deployment.
However, if you need more horsepower, you could serve the db40 off of another machine to distribute the work. Note that in this case you will have more network overhead / latency.
The C/S mode of db4o implies network communications and is slower. If you need multiple client sessions you don't necessarily need to go with C/S because there's an embedded server mode that allows to have multiple transactions in parallel without the overhead of networks communication:
http://developer.db4o.com/documentation/reference/db4o-8.0/java/reference/Content/client-server/embedded.htm
So if your use case allows it you could open an embedded server on the web server side and allow your server side asp.net app to talk to db4o using multiple transactions (eg one per web session) to persist objects. Note that under this scenario you can't persist objects from the client side (the web client talks to the server side of your app which takes care of persistence).
Important: in web scenarios is not uncommon that you close the db4o object container when a session is over. If you do this the object is no longer tracked by db4o and it will be treated as a new one on the next session. You'll have to find a way to reattach objects to its db4o identity on the server side for a different session (you can do that by querying for the object again on the server side).
Best!
German
At one of our client's site we have the following topology of BizTalk 2006 in production environment:
2 BizTalk Runtime servers
1 SQL Server with MsgBox and TrackingDB on it.
One of the runtime servers are dedicated physical server and the another is virtual server, though both have 4 CPUs and 8Gb of memory.
The physical server CPU is hardly in use while the virtual server is always on 50% - 60% of CPU usage.
Is there any way to configure the BizTalk load balancing algorithm in such a way that it would load on one server more than on the other?
Yes and no is the accurate answer :-)
Given one host, with one instance on each server, BizTalk would apply a simple round-robin approach to load balancing; as a service (orchestration or pipeline) is tied to a host the answer would be that for a single service it is not possible to assign more "weight" for a particular server -load would be spread evenly between the instances.
However, if you have multiple services, and it makes sense, you could distribute some of them exclusively to the physical box while some to both; this would mean that the physical box would take more load compare to the virtual one.
Obviously - on a two servers configuration - it does mean you lose redundancy though, a decision I would have not taken lightly so I would recommend against it.
(having said that - you say you have one SQL box, so perhaps redundancy is not a major issue?)
Also, if you're doing HTTP receives, check the donfiguration of your web load balancer. It maybe preferring one server over the other based on its configuration.
Another suggestion would be to disable the host instances on the VM and run primarily off of the physicaL box. If the physical box goes down, set up a MOM alert or such to kick off a script to start up the VMs host instances. We do something like this for FTP receives in our cluster.