[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.remoting

another remoting issue

Adam Snider

7/19/2004 6:34:00 PM

Suppose I have a class from a class library that opens a database
connection. I reference this class in both my
server code and my client code although it is only called within the server
code. For some reason, my client seems to want to open the database
connection itself, for instance, it returns an error saying the path to the
database could not be found. Why would it be giving me that error if the
server code is the one that is opening the connection? Any ideas?

Thanks,
Adam
3 Answers

Ken Kolda

7/19/2004 9:18:00 PM

0

You may need to provide additional info/code example to get any real help.
Off the top of my head, it sounds like you might be passing a
MarshalByRefObject-derived object to the server and invoking its methods
expecting them to be executed server-side. But since a MBR object lives in
the AppDomain in which it was created, the methods are actually invoked on
the client.

If you can, post a trivial example to demonstrate your problem.

Ken



"Adam Snider" <adam.snider@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:%23MlII2abEHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Suppose I have a class from a class library that opens a database
> connection. I reference this class in both my
> server code and my client code although it is only called within the
server
> code. For some reason, my client seems to want to open the database
> connection itself, for instance, it returns an error saying the path to
the
> database could not be found. Why would it be giving me that error if the
> server code is the one that is opening the connection? Any ideas?
>
> Thanks,
> Adam
>
>

Malcolm

7/26/2009 6:25:00 AM

0


In article <hgbn65tpjir68pfsb8t57of9ortn2vbm6f@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>:
>:In article <s3om651p2pa1jlmjbu4u15lp3c13cu6609@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
>:>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>:>
>:>:
>:>:In article <qpfm65tgqjthi6uh7lk99bn54ccaae5v79@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
>:>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
>:>:>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>:>:>
>:>:>:
>:>:>:In article <6kpk65h30b75fanp39hgvrnk7q2j0p2ubi@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
>:>:>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
>:>:>:>"deemsbill@aol.com" <deemsbill@aol.com> wrote:
>:>:>:>
>:>:>:>:On Jul 24, 11:34?am, Malcolm <Malc...@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>:>:>:>:> In article
>:>:>:>:> <ead273d5-f68d-41de-b3e8-c88db63be...@p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
>:>:>:>:> "deemsb...@aol.com" <deemsb...@aol.com> writes
>:>:>:>:> >
>:>:>:>:> > ? ? I'd say that an animal which is angry/frustrated/"in a bad
>:>:>:>:> >temper" is more likely to attack than one which is feeling okay.
>:>:>:>:> >Animals don't think the way we do, but I'm sure their
>:>:>:>:> >emotions colo(u)
>:>:>:>:> >r their actions.
>:>:>:>:>
>:>:>:>:> But there will be a reason behind the "bad temper", e.g., they are
>:>:>:>:> feeling threatened, are having their territory invaded, etc.
>:>:>:>:>
>:>:>:>:
>:>:>:>: Agreed.....but that doesn't really help the recipient of their,
>:>:>:>:uh, favors.
>:>:>:>:
>:>:>:>
>:>:>:>Yep. It's just that that reason may be something that Malcolm doesn't
>:>:>:>want to admit animals have the capability for.
>:>:>:>
>:>:>:
>:>:>:Rubbish. I am approaching this subject from the point of view of a
>:>:>:biologist with knowledge of animal behaviour.
>:>:>:
>:>:>
>:>:>Rubbish yourself. You are approaching this subject from the point of
>:>:>view of your own biases.
>:>:>
>:>:
>:>:Wrong. I am approaching this subject as a knowledgeable biologist.
>:>:
>:>
>:>No biases there...
>:>
>:
>:None. I'm just telling you why I have some knowledge of the subject
>:being discussed.
>:
>
>In other words, you're attempting the old logical fallacy:
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from...
>
Oh dear :-( You clearly need something to hide behind when you find
yourself out of your depth.

>:>:
>:>:I realise that this is difficult for someone as self-opinionated as you
>:>:to accept, but learn to live with and, indeed, try and learn from it.
>:>:
>:>
>:>I realise that this is difficult for someone as self-opinionated as
>:>you to accept, but learn to live with and, indeed, try and learn from
>:>it.
>:>
>:The opinions all came from you. When I started to put an opposing view,
>:
>
>You mean when you started offering your own opinions.
>
Facts, not opinions.

>:
>:you reacted by chucking your toys out of your pram, just as you have
>:done in thread after thread. Fine, if that's your style, but every so
>:often someone, on this occasion me, will, instead of ignoring you, try
>:and ascertain just what you think you know. I've done that in this
>:thread and exposed your lack of evidence for some of the claims that you
>:have made. Live with it.
>:
>
>You get what you give, Malcolm. The preceding sounds like it
>describes you equally well.
>
Well, you would say that, wouldn't you, as you clearly aren't in a
position to deny it?

>:>:
>:>:>:>He thinks people aren't animals, apparently, since he sees them as so
>:>:>:>very different from all the other animals insofar as motivation goes.
>:>:>:>
>:>:>:More rubbish. I don't think anything of the sort.
>:>:>
>:>:>More rubbish yourself. You don't ADMIT you think it, but why the
>:>:>indignation at the idea that feral dogs might attack 'for sport', just
>:>:>because they enjoy it?
>:>:>
>:>:There was no "indignation", merely pointing out that your suggestion was
>:>:not supported by any facts.
>:>:
>:>
>:>Which once again brings us back to people somehow being unique in
>:>these regards in your mind. They aren't.
>:>
>:I don't know where you got your knowledge to make that claim, but you
>:have failed to grasp that when it comes to behaviour, animals do not
>:behave the same as people.
>:
>
>Where's your 'scientific proof' of that?
>
It's available to anyone with eyes.

>:>:>Have you interviewed a lot of feral dogs and gotten their views on the
>:>:>subject?
>:>:>
>:>:Have you, as I believe that it was you who introduced them to this
>:>:thread? You claimed such knowledge about them that I trust you aren't
>:>:going to have to admit that you didn't interview some of them first.
>:>:
>:>
>:>You've just got to actually watch them instead of reading books in
>:>your comfortable chair...
>:>
>:More petty insults, ignoring, presumably deliberately in the hope that
>:it won't be noticed, that I've already told you that I have "studied
>:mammals and birds for many years". I would have thought that that was
>:clear enough. Obviously not, so I'll explain that what it means is that
>:I have spent long periods over many years studying different animals and
>:birds in the field, watching them, noting their behaviour, observing
>:their interactions with others of their kind, and with other species. At
>:the same time, I have kept myself abreast of the relevant literature to
>:see what other researchers have been discovering. In this way, I believe
>:I am well enough up on the subject to make some informed comments, and
>:indeed to correct someone who was passing opinions about animal
>:behaviour which have no basis in fact.
>
>In other words, you think your opinion is 'proof'.
>
No. That's completely wrong. See my remark in another response about
your inability to comprehend the written word.



>It's not. Get over it.
>
I've nothing to "get over". I have some knowledge, I was trying to
impart it. Some people clearly don't like having their opinons
contradicted.

>You think your smug superiority and the insults you which it engenders
>and which you spew are somehow 'different' from anyone else, just as
>you think human animals are somehow 'different' from all others.
>
Do I? How uninteresting.

>You're self-deluded, Malcolm. You don't even recognize your own
>behaviour, so how can any credibility be given to what you think you
>observe?
>
Bye for now, Fred. You're way out of your depth and I'm not going to
bother with you anymore on this subject. Indeed, I'll let you have the
last word so that you can massage your bruised ego by thinking that, in
some weird way, you have "won".

--
Malcolm

La N

7/26/2009 6:34:00 AM

0


"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:z5c97XoKb$aKFwXP@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> >>
> Bye for now, Fred. You're way out of your depth and I'm not going to
> bother with you anymore on this subject. Indeed, I'll let you have the
> last word so that you can massage your bruised ego by thinking that, in
> some weird way, you have "won".
>
> --

Bless you. Now can you answer some of my questions? I find some of the
most brilliant people are Scots, including many of my rellies. That is why
I am here, among other reasons. To banter with Scots who know a lot about a
lot.

- nilita, painting her toenails on a Saturday night, dreaming of a cruise in
2010, and looking for intelligent life ... ;-)