|
|
It's caused by the flunge panel cross dock inhibitor releasing locks on the bit-bat meta-glup of the file. 
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, maybe some cleverer people than myself can help with this one. We have a business-critical application which runs with a MSSQL backend and generates a lot of documents (letters, etc., in Word and PDF format). At present the documents are just stored in a share on the same server as the database, with the filenames stored in a table and the documents called directly from the application on client computers when requested (I didn't design this, by the way!).
A little while ago, due to storage space issues on the server, I decided to move the documents off the server and onto a dedicated NAS (Netgear ReadyNAS 2100) with lots of capacity rather than just beef up the server's disk space. My reasoning was that the network load would be spread between the server and the NAS, instead of the server's NIC handling both database and document traffic. In practice, the performance of opening documents actually decreased dramatically for those departments which I migrated to the NAS, to the point where I halted the migration. Sometimes documents on the NAS open perfectly quickly, and a user will have no speed issues for several minutes or hours. Then, suddenly, one file will take literally a minute or more to open. These are only small Word documents and I'm only talking about a few dozen users who have been migrated.
ANYWAY, what I'm getting to is that it's time to replace all of this hardware anyway. I'm about to purchase a very powerful, fast server to replace the DB server. Reviews suggest that its I/O performance is exceptional. But I was also going to purchase a new, high-performance NAS and stick with the topology I've already described. My theory is that the speed issues are being caused by some deep-level communication problem between the Netgear ReadyNAS and the clients, which neither they nor I have been able to get to the bottom of. It still seems like sound reasoning to me that separating database and documents will result in a spread network load and increased performance. Am I wrong?
I don't know the technicalities involved in opening a document in a network share. Is it perhaps the case that the process of establishing a connection to the share and opening a file, at least the first time in a session, is much slower than opening the same file stored on the database server, to which a 'connection' is already established due to the user having been using the database?
Any discussion or advice on this topic would be greatly appreciated. If stuffing the database server full of disks and keeping the files on there is going to be the fastest solution, I'll save a whole lot of money!
Sorry for the wall of text - thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say there was soemthing wrong with your existing NAS. A firmware update might fix it, if there is one.
But, unless the server is being pounded constantly with tons of disk and network I/O, you're really not going to see any kind of performance benefit by going to an external NAS.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
i am going to use Wayne nucleus point of sale machine and i am developing my own back office system to manage data from this POS. is there any documentation on how do i configure my back office system with Wayne nucleus point of sale or it will be more convenient if someone can give me a link to Wayne nucleus technical support team via any email address or phone number.
thnx.
Shoaib Hassan
|
|
|
|
|
I think first you need to learn how to do this[^].
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
Muhammad Rashid Khan wrote: please explain your answer ,i did't get you what wanted to say. I have already configured my application with Gilbarco passport and now i am moving to Wayne nucleus.
Then you should follow the links I provided, find the Wayne nucleus web site and ask them for help.
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
This sort of message does not belong in the forums. If you wish to write an article or tip then please use the appropriate section.
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
That message seems fairly clear, you have a suspect hard drive. Follow the suggestions on the message.
Binding 100,000 items to a list box can be just silly regardless of what pattern you are following. Jeremy Likness
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I'm new in this forum and in that environment.
I'm searching some solution to data acquisition 8 channels of audio. Firstly, I want to try to read the audio PC card and view that data. Can you help me how I can start this acquisition?
I don't know how I can do it.
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
Try Audacity
====================================
Transvestites - Roberts in Disguise!
====================================
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday I ran into a oddity that might be handy for some folks.
Recently a SCADA system PC crashed on me, one which we purchased fully integrated and with no documentation. I bought a new Win7 box to replace it, recovered the hard drive, and copied all the files I thought looked related to the SCADA system. I called the manufacturer, but they refused to talk to me, and insisted that the licensing and configuration had to be done by the company that integrated the thing for us. After much haggling, I finally got that outfit to consent to 30 minutes of telephone support.
In the course of setting things up, one of the tasks required was to add a System DSN used to establish ODBC connections to the .mdb database used by the SCADA product, so I opened up the usual ODBC Sources applet in Control Panel. Surprisingly, only SQL Server was installed and available for use - no other drivers were listed. I've never seen that in a Windows system before.
After much gnashing of teeth and rending of clothing, the support guy stumbled on a link somewhere that suggested running an obscure program located at C:\Windows\SysWOW64\odbcad32.exe. I don't know where he found it, but running it produces a ODBC Sources applet identical to the one reached through Control Panel, but containing all the usual sources. From that point on, it was an easy setup, but I would never in many years have found that ridiculous hidden tool.
No I have to wonder, what other missing functionality is hidden in this folder? Any other hints?
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember reading an article about it a few years back. There were some more examples besides ODBC that was hidden the same way, can't remember which ones though.
It seems that when Microsoft drops support for a product (in this case ODBC) they don't actually drop it immediately, they just make it "invisible" for developers so that they won't use it for new products. But they remain available, with some tweaking, for a couple of versions so that they don't lose sales to people in exactly your situation.
|
|
|
|
|
Ahh, that's the 32 bit ODBC manager. Basically, on a 64 bit machine, you can have 64 bit and 32 bit ODBC drivers installed. The normal place to look for the drivers is in the 32 bit version, but the actual ODBC applet that runs is the 64 bit one. This is why I have a shortcut to odbcad32 on my desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! Handy information to have, especially with so many Access-based products still out there. Fortunately, no one is still running any of my Paradox stuff anymore. 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone help me to interpret what's going on here?
My Junk Mail folder is filling up rapidly with email rejection notices. This has been going on sporadically for a couple of weeks, with a flurry of several hundred such messages, then a trickle, then none for a day or two before it starts again. A typical message is:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
remy525@yahoo.com
SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data:
host mta5.am0.yahoodns.net [67.195.103.233]: 554 Message not allowed - [299]
------ This is a copy of the message's headers. ------
Return-path: <<code>my.address</code>>
Received: from bosmailscan10.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.10])
by bosmailout03.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim)
id 1SG1aE-0003Tv-28
for remy525@yahoo.com; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:19:38 -0400
Received: from bosimpout01.eigbox.net ([10.20.55.1])
by bosmailscan10.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim)
id 1SG1aD-0006DH-IJ
for remy525@yahoo.com; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:19:37 -0400
Received: from bosauthsmtp01.eigbox.net ([10.20.18.1])
by bosimpout01.eigbox.net with NO UCE
id uVKd1i00301P9Sa01VKddX; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:19:37 -0400
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=eq1oOPVX c=1 sm=1
a=z5zA2GEyXHX4FYSAKYr2NA==:17 a=7UmD-tR_JRgA:10 a=VG0OwtqChsEA:10
a=8AlaD7fTCjEA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=Sh_hsHRGdUoA:10 a=qrrI46oVAAAA:8
a=IIUmFY3D8pfpmdMjRkQA:9 a=gBDzBF7yGH2_iO3muJQA:7 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10
a=NTIIGRmZMWAA:10 a=P3BRNhQXk_0A:10 a=gYNu_iXhhMS5DrdM:21
a=St506IR-4_hhMAsl:21 a=FLmnjis/JmE4jomwi6pJ+A==:117
X-EN-OrigOutIP: 10.20.18.1
X-EN-IMPSID: uVKd1i00301P9Sa01VKddX
Received: from 141.24.27.77.dynamic.mundo-r.com ([77.27.24.141] helo=Servidor)
by bosauthsmtp01.eigbox.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128)
(Exim)
id 1SG1aD-0008JG-FT
for remy525@yahoo.com; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:19:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 07:19:33 +0200
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.3) Personal
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: eyes," is caused now."Astute build raised its Carvers' to Lord idea or tell "Someone cried, "But ritual emptiness marring the foolish of this endless uncles,
From: my.address
To: remy525@yahoo.com
Message-ID: <CHILKAT-MID-e8cdfeda-d286-1c59-2362-82cf65c1e5d5@Servidor>
X-EN-UserInfo: c996fca110e1529a133127fe8b9b68eb:71b24f1e944ec8a088e91647e108c312
X-EN-AuthUser: <code>My.address</code>
Sender: <code>my.address</code>
X-EN-OrigIP: 77.27.24.141
X-EN-OrigHost: 141.24.27.77.dynamic.mundo-r.com
X-EN-Class: impout
The only constant is the reference to "bosxxxxxxx.eigbox.net" in the middle portion of the message header. Everything else in the message changes at random, and the IP addresses associated with my email address don't match anything I've ever used. What is doing this, and which server is compromised? Should I notify the admin for the eigbox.net domain that this is going on, or is that being spoofed, too?
My concern here is that some of the dumber blacklist algorithms might block me widely because they use the spoofed email address instead of examining the IP address. This small flood is a sign to me of a much larger iceberg melting (global warming, perhaps?) with only the tip showing up in my mailbox. Should I be concerned?
Will Rogers never met me.
modified 16-Apr-12 14:52pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Roger,
It looks like someone in northern Spain is sending out bulk e-mails and the Yahoo server is rejecting them. The mails are most likely originating from an innocent individual infected with a botnet mailer.
There is a little more to it than that... based on the mail header you posted... it appears that the mail server at bosauthsmtp01.eigbox.net is a misconfigured mail server. It looks like the assigned ip block where the mail server lives is 38.113.1.0/24 and is owned by 'Endurance International Group' according to the records[^]. The registered AS number for that IP block is AS29873[^] and you could attempt to contact them. In my experience... nobody every responds to abuse complaints unless there is a warrant attached.
The reason nobody responds to complaints probably has something to do with the fact that poor little Brian appears to be responsible for 79,461[^] domains within that ip range. And thats just one of the 51 ip blocks he appears to be responsible for.
Roger Wright wrote: Should I be concerned?
There isn't much you can do about it... the SMTP protocols were not very well designed and the protocol allows spoofing. It is up to the mail server software to prevent this. Your ISP or web hosting provider should be diligent with keeping the mail servers properly configured.
By the way you should probably remove your rawright.net[^] e-mail address from the mail header you posted. But because you left it there... I was able to determine that your domain name rawright.net at 66.96.146.82 is on the 66.96.128.0/18 ip block[^] which poor little Brian is responsible for[^]. I hope you don't mind... I hacked, probed and prodded your box a little bit... and it appears to be running IIS/6.0 on windows server.
Some thoughts:
I was able to connect to your rawright.net SMTP port 25 and forge my origin domain. The SMTP server did not complain. A well configured an e-mail server will perform a reverse DNS here and make sure my IP address matches the domain from the HELO command. I connected multiple times and each time I was routed through a different *.eigbox.net smtp authorization server. It looks like your service provider is using some sort of round robin BGP/GLBP routing.
I spent a few minutes manually testing your mail server via raw TCP socket but always recieved the error: 550 bosauthsmtp: Host x.x.x.x: No unauthenticated relaying permitted (I used all of the tricks I know about and was unable to trick the server into allowing me to relay mail. This is what we want). So maybe its already fixed. But maybe it is not fixed... if you look closely at the mail header you posted... it says the spam came via ESMTPSA which means the spam was sent over an encrypted TLS[^]. Although I would probably continue testing via TLSWrap[^]... I think I'll not test any further. It may be that their plain text SMTP server is well protected... but the encrypted SMTP is vulnerable.
Anyway we could speculate about this all day... but the best person to handle this would be a systems administrator from your rawright.net hosting provider.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Fived as I'm impressed.
|
|
|
|
|
Ditto, 5 just because of the results of your investigation
|
|
|
|
|
I thought I'd removed all those references. 
I'm quite impressed by the amount of information you were able to glean. FYI, I don't control the SMTP server - webhost4life.com does that. Perhaps it's time for another move, painful as the last one was.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Can I create a new sql server user who can only view(read only) a specific view in my database. I don't want to allow this user to see/read/write anything else in database.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am coming from the business side rather than from the IT side, but I have been asked to solve a business problem that I think is totally common nowadays, and I hope you can help me with some system admin solutions.
I need to know if my idea will work and it would be very helpful if you could point out some problems areas that I need to consider.
We are a large international organization with a Microsoft infrastructure and about 200 staff who travel frequently. They typically use laptops we provide, but also they want to use their own devices (Bring Your Own Device = BYOD) such as iPads, Macintosh laptops, smartphones, Android tablets, you name it.
What I would like to say to our staff is this:
"Your work computer will be a laptop that you can take home with you or take abroad on your travels.
When you receive this computer it will come with a set of standard software installed, including anti-virus software. Thereafter you have admin rights over this laptop, you are completely responsible for everything on this computer, including backups, just as if it were your personal property. When you leave our organization, you turn your computer in.
"You store your work on your own computer, so you are responsible for backups. If you finish something that should be shared with your colleagues, you upload it to our corporate intranet online, and you let people know it’s there.
"When you come to the office, you will be able to plug your laptop into a docking station with a large-screen monitor and a keyboard. You can log into our network on your office computer, but not on any personal device.
"If you want to access the Internet or printers with any device other than your office laptop you can do so wirelessly."
What do you experienced System Administrators think of this approach. I know our staff would love me for it because they have some big problems with the security of our network, because they can't BYOD, they can install personal software on their laptops, getting software updates is a big hassle with the IT department, etc.
Thanks in advance for your help!
- Thom
|
|
|
|
|
quinet wrote: I know our staff would love me for it
And I suspect your IT department and company lawyers would hate you. IT security is a very serious business and in any corporate organisation it is important to keep good control in order to protect your financial and intellectual property. If you open up your corporate network so people can hook their own systems into it whenever they like, then you are likely to face some serious issues. However many promises people make and however many rules you ask them to follow, the system will be abused.
My advice, don't do it.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff
I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
,i:71&tx=468&ty=253
