Shared application

**Jan** · Nov 20 '05, 04:28 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Nick,

To share the assembly just have it loaded in the GAC, instead of in each
applications local directory. Mind however that this requires "strong
naming" for the assembly.

Hopes this helps,
Jan

"Nak" <a@a.com> wrote in message
news:OyAnyN0kDH A.3316@tk2msftn gp13.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Hi there,
>
> In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so to speak I would
> create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose objects of the
> application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is the equivilent in
> VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be communicated with
> using remoting? or are there other ways?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Nick.
>
> --
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
>
> Fergus - September 5th 2003
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
>
>[/color]

**Guest** · Nov 20 '05, 04:28 AM

Re: Shared application

will it also get installed in com+[color=blue]
>-----Original Message-----
>Hi Nick,
>
>To share the assembly just have it loaded in the GAC,[/color]
instead of in each[color=blue]
>applications local directory. Mind however that this[/color]
requires "strong[color=blue]
>naming" for the assembly.
>
>Hopes this helps,
>Jan
>
>"Nak" <a@a.com> wrote in message
>news:OyAnyN0kD HA.3316@tk2msft ngp13.phx.gbl.. .[color=green]
>> Hi there,
>>
>> In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so[/color][/color]
to speak I would[color=blue][color=green]
>> create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose[/color][/color]
objects of the[color=blue][color=green]
>> application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is[/color][/color]
the equivilent in[color=blue][color=green]
>> VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be[/color][/color]
communicated with[color=blue][color=green]
>> using remoting? or are there other ways?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Nick.
>>
>> --
>>[/color]
>/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/[/color]
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue][color=green]
>> "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
>>
>> Fergus - September 5th 2003
>>[/color]
>/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/[/color]
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue][color=green]
>>
>>[/color]
>
>
>.
>[/color]

**Nak** · Nov 20 '05, 04:28 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi there,
[color=blue]
> To share the assembly just have it loaded in the GAC, instead of in each
> applications local directory. Mind however that this requires "strong
> naming" for the assembly.[/color]

Yes, I understand this, but it is not the same as an ActiveX executable.
With an ActiveX executable you can have 1 instance of an application
launched and have its objects exposed and used by other applications as if
it were a DLL of some kind, but it had the benefit of being a running
application.

I'll give you an example of the use,

* I have a shared application that downloads data from the internet
on request of other applications, just a like a download manager, but each
request is qued so only 1 is downloading at a time.

* When the shared application is first called it is loaded, unless it
is already loaded then the existing instance is used, instead of launching a
new one.

* The properties of the shared application are visible to all that
are consuming it, that being if one were to change a property, all of the
other applications consuming it would be able to see the change.

I can think of one way so far, and that is by using remoting, but I'm
not sure if this is a little overkill for what I wanted. Unless of course
you are saying that you can load *any* assembly into the GAC and have it's
objects exposed? I haven't tried this approach as I wasn't sure that you
could.

Nick.

--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."

Fergus - September 5th 2003
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

**Fergus Cooney** · Nov 20 '05, 04:28 AM

Re: Shared application

Howdy Nick,

It sounds like you are talking about the .NET equivalent of Automation. Is
this the case or is it that you want just a single instance, so if a second
starts up it will defer to the first?

Regards,
Fergus

**Nak** · Nov 20 '05, 04:29 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Fergus,
[color=blue]
> It sounds like you are talking about the .NET equivalent of[/color]
Automation. Is[color=blue]
> this the case or is it that you want just a single instance, so if a[/color]
second[color=blue]
> starts up it will defer to the first?[/color]

Basically, I want an executable that exposes an interface for other
applications wanting to consume it. Umm, I'm trying to think of an example,
lets say I have an application running that exposes an interface, and that
interface contains 1 method, that method being

tellMeYourName( Byval iName as string)

Any other application could call this method and the application would
display any passed names into a list box. Hmm, I'm not even sure if that is
a good example, the only way I could think of was remoting, but I'm not
quite sure how I would achieve this.

Isn't remoting just TCP/IP but with serializable objects being passed
backwards and forwards? So basically, would I do this by creating
serializable request and response objects in a completely different
assembly. The make a host that recieves the request object, processes it
and then sends back a response object to the client? That sounds like it
would make sence but I am not event sure if this is possible??

Thanks for all your helps so far :-)

Nick.

--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."

Fergus - September 5th 2003
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

**Fergus Cooney** · Nov 20 '05, 04:29 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Nick,

I'm afraid this is actually a thread that I'm watching so that I can learn
something. No answers from me as yet.

Remoting is an area that is definitely on my todo list but hasn't had its
turn yet. In addition to some books on gaming, I've got an interesting book
that goes into remoting. I must do something about them sometime (lol!).

If remoting uses TCP/IP and serialised objects when on the same machine,
it does sound like a hammer for a nut. I've seen posts from people talking
about exposing COM interfaces from .NET - surely that must be possible so that
you an automate like Word, Excel, etc. I don't know whether or how, though.
And I'd certainly like to.

In the absence of an official method, you could use good old Windows
messages between your clients and your downloader. But let's see what ideas
turn up from others.

Regards,
Fergus

**Nak** · Nov 20 '05, 04:29 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Fergus,
[color=blue]
> Remoting is an area that is definitely on my todo list but hasn't had[/color]
its[color=blue]
> turn yet. In addition to some books on gaming, I've got an interesting[/color]
book[color=blue]
> that goes into remoting. I must do something about them sometime (lol!).[/color]

LOL, cool :-)
[color=blue]
> If remoting uses TCP/IP and serialised objects when on the same[/color]
machine,[color=blue]
> it does sound like a hammer for a nut. I've seen posts from people talking
> about exposing COM interfaces from .NET - surely that must be possible so[/color]
that[color=blue]
> you an automate like Word, Excel, etc. I don't know whether or how,[/color]
though.[color=blue]
> And I'd certainly like to.[/color]

Yeah, I thought it was maybe the wrong choice too, it's also pretty unsecure
as well I suppose, I would have to transmit encrypted data back and forth.
Though I like the idea of the "shared application" existing on a different
system in the network.
[color=blue]
> In the absence of an official method, you could use good old Windows
> messages between your clients and your downloader. But let's see what[/color]
ideas[color=blue]
> turn up from others.[/color]

--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."

Fergus - September 5th 2003
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"Fergus Cooney" <filter-1@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:enqr9G2kDH A.976@tk2msftng p13.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Hi Nick,
>
> I'm afraid this is actually a thread that I'm watching so that I can[/color]
learn[color=blue]
> something. No answers from me as yet.
>[/color]
[color=blue]
>[/color]
[color=blue]
>[/color]
[color=blue]
>
> Regards,
> Fergus
>
>
>[/color]

**Nak** · Nov 20 '05, 04:29 AM

Re: Shared application

> In the absence of an official method, you could use good old Windows[color=blue]
> messages between your clients and your downloader. But let's see what[/color]
ideas[color=blue]
> turn up from others.[/color]

F*U*K*NG OUTLOOK!

Right.....

I was going to say, I'm thinking of this "singleton" thing now, I'm not sure
if that is what I want. Lets say this,

* The "shared application" creates a singleton object with a shared
method that enables other assemblies that register a communication object
with it

* When the singleton recieves these shared methods it stores the
communcation object in a hashtable in the "shared application" and
communicates via that

This sounds pretty easy, though I am not sure how feazable it is, I suppose
the singleton would have to have an event or delegate function to notify the
"shared application" of the recieving of the communication object.....

~~ "shared application"

Private withevents thesingletonthi ng as new singletonthing
Private cHTeCommObjects as new hashtable

Private sub thesingletonthi ng_recievecommo bject(Byval iObject as object)
handles thesingletonthi ng.recievecommo bject
call cHTeCommObjects .add(iObject.Ge tHashCode,iObje ct)
End Sub

~~

~~ "consumer" of "shared application"

Private thesingletonthi ng as new singletonthing
Private mycommobject as new object

Private sub registerit()
call thesingletonthi ng.register(myc ommobject)
End sub

~~

I know I missed allot if things out in this, I think I shall have to give it
a go tommorrow, too late now, but if the communication object contains a few
events for things like recieving data on the "shared application" side and
on the consumer side, and a method to transmit to both. Although these
would be exposed to both, hmm, I'm probably taking crap now.

Can any singleton guys throw light on this one? Thanks loads again :-)

Nick.

--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."

Fergus - September 5th 2003
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"Fergus Cooney" <filter-1@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:enqr9G2kDH A.976@tk2msftng p13.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Hi Nick,
>
> I'm afraid this is actually a thread that I'm watching so that I can[/color]
learn[color=blue]
> something. No answers from me as yet.
>
> Remoting is an area that is definitely on my todo list but hasn't had[/color]
its[color=blue]
> turn yet. In addition to some books on gaming, I've got an interesting[/color]
book[color=blue]
> that goes into remoting. I must do something about them sometime (lol!).
>
> If remoting uses TCP/IP and serialised objects when on the same[/color]
machine,[color=blue]
> it does sound like a hammer for a nut. I've seen posts from people talking
> about exposing COM interfaces from .NET - surely that must be possible so[/color]
that[color=blue]
> you an automate like Word, Excel, etc. I don't know whether or how,[/color]
though.[color=blue]
> And I'd certainly like to.
>
> In the absence of an official method, you could use good old Windows
> messages between your clients and your downloader. But let's see what[/color]
ideas[color=blue]
> turn up from others.
>
> Regards,
> Fergus
>
>
>[/color]

**Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]** · Nov 20 '05, 04:30 AM

RE: Shared application

Hi Nak,

Yes, you can use singleton pattern to guarantee that there will only be one
instance running.
For more information, you can refer to:

Attention Required! | Cloudflare

http://www.codeguru.com/columns/VB/PK021102.html

Also, I think it is easy for you to use process class to check the repeated
instance.
You can visit the link below for details:

Windows Forms FAQs—Common Questions | Syncfusion

http://www.syncfusion.com/FAQ/WinForms/FAQ_c40c.asp#q550q

Get detailed answers to common queries about Syncfusion Windows Forms components covering installation, features, licensing, and developer support.

Hope this helps,
Best regards,
Jeffrey Tan
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

--------------------
| From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
| Subject: Shared application
| Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:40:44 +0100
| Lines: 20
| X-Priority: 3
| X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
| Message-ID: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
| Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
| Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
| Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:146979
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
|
| Hi there,
|
| In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so to speak I would
| create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose objects of the
| application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is the equivilent in
| VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be communicated with
| using remoting? or are there other ways?
|
| Thanks in advance.
|
| Nick.
|
| --
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
|
| Fergus - September 5th 2003
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
|
|
|

**Nak** · Nov 20 '05, 04:31 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Jeffrey,
[color=blue]
> Yes, you can use singleton pattern to guarantee that there will only be[/color]
one[color=blue]
> instance running.
> For more information, you can refer to:
> http://www.codeguru.com/columns/VB/PK021102.html[/color]

I have just taken a look at the article, very interesting. I also tried to
implement it but I came across an obvious downfall, you can only have 1
instance of a singleton per process, so if I were to make 2 consumers of the
singleton they would both use a completely different instance. I hadn't
thought of this happening even though it is quite obvious, unless there is a
way to share the singleton between processes?

I suppose maybe what I am actually after is making a windows service, *but*
I have not yet seen any examples that show how you communicate with a
windows service other than to stop or start etc. Would this require
remoting? Or is there some simple method that I have missed somewhere along
the lines? Thanks for your help :-)

Nick.

--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."

Fergus - September 5th 2003
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
""Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]"" <v-jetan@online.mi crosoft.com> wrote in message
news:fDTfqp6kDH A.1548@cpmsftng xa06.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>
> Hi Nak,
>[/color]
[color=blue]
>
> Also, I think it is easy for you to use process class to check the[/color]
repeated[color=blue]
> instance.
> You can visit the link below for details:
> http://www.syncfusion.com/FAQ/WinFor...c40c.asp#q550q
>
> Hope this helps,
> Best regards,
> Jeffrey Tan
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
> --------------------
> | From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
> | Subject: Shared application
> | Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:40:44 +0100
> | Lines: 20
> | X-Priority: 3
> | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
> | Message-ID: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
> | Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
> | NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
> | Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
> | Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:146979
> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
> |
> | Hi there,
> |
> | In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so to speak I would
> | create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose objects of the
> | application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is the equivilent in
> | VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be communicated with
> | using remoting? or are there other ways?
> |
> | Thanks in advance.
> |
> | Nick.
> |
> | --
> |
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> | "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
> |
> | Fergus - September 5th 2003
> |
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> |
> |
> |
>[/color]

**Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]** · Nov 20 '05, 04:34 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Nak,

I think create as windows service is not a good idea.
I think my another way of solution that use Process class is suitable for
you.

Best regards,
Jeffrey Tan
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

--------------------
| From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
| References: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
<fDTfqp6kDHA.15 48@cpmsftngxa06 .phx.gbl>
| Subject: Re: Shared application
| Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:41:30 +0100
| Lines: 93
| X-Priority: 3
| X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
| Message-ID: <#q1Ssp9kDHA.25 36@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
| Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
| Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
| Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:147242
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
|
| Hi Jeffrey,
|
| > Yes, you can use singleton pattern to guarantee that there will only be
| one
| > instance running.
| > For more information, you can refer to:
| > http://www.codeguru.com/columns/VB/PK021102.html
|
| I have just taken a look at the article, very interesting. I also tried
to
| implement it but I came across an obvious downfall, you can only have 1
| instance of a singleton per process, so if I were to make 2 consumers of
the
| singleton they would both use a completely different instance. I hadn't
| thought of this happening even though it is quite obvious, unless there
is a
| way to share the singleton between processes?
|
| I suppose maybe what I am actually after is making a windows service,
*but*
| I have not yet seen any examples that show how you communicate with a
| windows service other than to stop or start etc. Would this require
| remoting? Or is there some simple method that I have missed somewhere
along
| the lines? Thanks for your help :-)
|
| Nick.
|
| --
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
|
| Fergus - September 5th 2003
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| ""Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]"" <v-jetan@online.mi crosoft.com> wrote in message
| news:fDTfqp6kDH A.1548@cpmsftng xa06.phx.gbl...
| >
| > Hi Nak,
| >
|
| >
| > Also, I think it is easy for you to use process class to check the
| repeated
| > instance.
| > You can visit the link below for details:
| > http://www.syncfusion.com/FAQ/WinFor...c40c.asp#q550q
| >
| > Hope this helps,
| > Best regards,
| > Jeffrey Tan
| > Microsoft Online Partner Support
| > Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
| > This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
rights.
| >
| > --------------------
| > | From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
| > | Subject: Shared application
| > | Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:40:44 +0100
| > | Lines: 20
| > | X-Priority: 3
| > | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| > | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
| > | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
| > | Message-ID: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
| > | Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| > | NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
| > | Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
| > | Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:146979
| > | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| > |
| > | Hi there,
| > |
| > | In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so to speak I
would
| > | create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose objects of the
| > | application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is the equivilent
in
| > | VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be communicated
with
| > | using remoting? or are there other ways?
| > |
| > | Thanks in advance.
| > |
| > | Nick.
| > |
| > | --
| > |
| >
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| > | "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
| > |
| > | Fergus - September 5th 2003
| > |
| >
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| > |
| > |
| > |
| >
|
|
|

**Nak** · Nov 20 '05, 04:35 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Jeffry,
[color=blue]
> I think create as windows service is not a good idea.[/color]

Well, considering I would like the application to be able to run on a remote
system if possible, this isn't that bad an idea. Why do you not think it
would be a good idea? I'm interested to know, maybe I have missed some
points.
[color=blue]
> I think my another way of solution that use Process class is suitable for
> you.[/color]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by using the process class, I wasn't aware
that it allowed for interprocess communication? I have found a nice little
demo of a singleton design pattern being used in a remote object (In the 101
VB.NET examples) and it seems like it might be what I want. I'm just having
issues trying to replecate exactly what I am after but I'm sure it might be
the way.

Thanks for your help and advice. :-)

Nick.

--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."

Fergus - September 5th 2003
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
""Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]"" <v-jetan@online.mi crosoft.com> wrote in message
news:AXv%23FDIl DHA.576@cpmsftn gxa06.phx.gbl.. .[color=blue]
>
> Hi Nak,
>[/color]
[color=blue]
>
> Best regards,
> Jeffrey Tan
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
> --------------------
> | From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
> | References: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
> <fDTfqp6kDHA.15 48@cpmsftngxa06 .phx.gbl>
> | Subject: Re: Shared application
> | Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:41:30 +0100
> | Lines: 93
> | X-Priority: 3
> | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
> | Message-ID: <#q1Ssp9kDHA.25 36@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
> | Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
> | NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
> | Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
> | Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:147242
> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
> |
> | Hi Jeffrey,
> |
> | > Yes, you can use singleton pattern to guarantee that there will only[/color]
be[color=blue]
> | one
> | > instance running.
> | > For more information, you can refer to:
> | > http://www.codeguru.com/columns/VB/PK021102.html
> |
> | I have just taken a look at the article, very interesting. I also tried
> to
> | implement it but I came across an obvious downfall, you can only have 1
> | instance of a singleton per process, so if I were to make 2 consumers of
> the
> | singleton they would both use a completely different instance. I hadn't
> | thought of this happening even though it is quite obvious, unless there
> is a
> | way to share the singleton between processes?
> |
> | I suppose maybe what I am actually after is making a windows service,
> *but*
> | I have not yet seen any examples that show how you communicate with a
> | windows service other than to stop or start etc. Would this require
> | remoting? Or is there some simple method that I have missed somewhere
> along
> | the lines? Thanks for your help :-)
> |
> | Nick.
> |
> | --
> |
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> | "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
> |
> | Fergus - September 5th 2003
> |
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> | ""Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]"" <v-jetan@online.mi crosoft.com> wrote in message
> | news:fDTfqp6kDH A.1548@cpmsftng xa06.phx.gbl...
> | >
> | > Hi Nak,
> | >
> |
> | >
> | > Also, I think it is easy for you to use process class to check the
> | repeated
> | > instance.
> | > You can visit the link below for details:
> | > http://www.syncfusion.com/FAQ/WinFor...c40c.asp#q550q
> | >
> | > Hope this helps,
> | > Best regards,
> | > Jeffrey Tan
> | > Microsoft Online Partner Support
> | > Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> | > This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
> rights.
> | >
> | > --------------------
> | > | From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
> | > | Subject: Shared application
> | > | Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:40:44 +0100
> | > | Lines: 20
> | > | X-Priority: 3
> | > | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> | > | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
> | > | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
> | > | Message-ID: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
> | > | Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
> | > | NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
> | > | Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
> | > | Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl[/color]
microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:146979[color=blue]
> | > | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
> | > |
> | > | Hi there,
> | > |
> | > | In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so to speak I
> would
> | > | create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose objects of the
> | > | application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is the equivilent
> in
> | > | VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be communicated
> with
> | > | using remoting? or are there other ways?
> | > |
> | > | Thanks in advance.
> | > |
> | > | Nick.
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > |
> | >
> |
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> | > | "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
> | > |
> | > | Fergus - September 5th 2003
> | > |
> | >
> |
>[/color]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\[color=blue]
> | > |
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> |
> |
> |
>[/color]

**Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]** · Nov 20 '05, 04:43 AM

Re: Shared application

Hi Nak,

What I said Windows service is not a good idea means this is not a
recommanded solution.(Thoug h I think it also can achieve what you want)
Windows service application is more complex and it can not have GUI
interface or CUI interface, so if you want to use windows service, you must
use this service as a subprogram for you application.(I think this is
inconvinience and is not a good idea)

The process class solution that I mentioned is judge the repeated process
by process name, details I have provided you in this link:

Windows Forms FAQs—Common Questions | Syncfusion

http://www.syncfusion.com/FAQ/WinForms/FAQ_c40c.asp#q550q

Get detailed answers to common queries about Syncfusion Windows Forms components covering installation, features, licensing, and developer support.

But I think this solution is also very well, other processes may have the
same name with you process.

So it seems that the better solution in .Net is using remoting, I have just
found an article related to only keep one instance through remoting, please
refer to the "Single-Instance Applications" and "Behind the Scenes"
sections in the link below:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwinforms/

html/reaworapps1.asp ?frame=true

I hope what I said make sence to you, if you still have any unclear, please
feel free to let me know, I am glad to work with you :)

Best regards,
Jeffrey Tan
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

--------------------
| From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
| References: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
<fDTfqp6kDHA.15 48@cpmsftngxa06 .phx.gbl>
<#q1Ssp9kDHA.25 36@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
<AXv#FDIlDHA.57 6@cpmsftngxa06. phx.gbl>
| Subject: Re: Shared application
| Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:34:31 +0100
| Lines: 176
| X-Priority: 3
| X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
| Message-ID: <uFNfbKKlDHA.22 68@TK2MSFTNGP12 .phx.gbl>
| Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
| Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!TK2 MSFTNGP12.phx.g bl
| Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:147623
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
|
| Hi Jeffry,
|
| > I think create as windows service is not a good idea.
|
| Well, considering I would like the application to be able to run on a
remote
| system if possible, this isn't that bad an idea. Why do you not think it
| would be a good idea? I'm interested to know, maybe I have missed some
| points.
|
| > I think my another way of solution that use Process class is suitable
for
| > you.
|
| I'm not quite sure what you mean by using the process class, I wasn't
aware
| that it allowed for interprocess communication? I have found a nice
little
| demo of a singleton design pattern being used in a remote object (In the
101
| VB.NET examples) and it seems like it might be what I want. I'm just
having
| issues trying to replecate exactly what I am after but I'm sure it might
be
| the way.
|
| Thanks for your help and advice. :-)
|
| Nick.
|
| --
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
|
| Fergus - September 5th 2003
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| ""Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]"" <v-jetan@online.mi crosoft.com> wrote in message
| news:AXv%23FDIl DHA.576@cpmsftn gxa06.phx.gbl.. .
| >
| > Hi Nak,
| >
|
| >
| > Best regards,
| > Jeffrey Tan
| > Microsoft Online Partner Support
| > Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
| > This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
rights.
| >
| > --------------------
| > | From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
| > | References: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
| > <fDTfqp6kDHA.15 48@cpmsftngxa06 .phx.gbl>
| > | Subject: Re: Shared application
| > | Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:41:30 +0100
| > | Lines: 93
| > | X-Priority: 3
| > | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| > | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
| > | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
| > | Message-ID: <#q1Ssp9kDHA.25 36@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
| > | Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| > | NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
| > | Path: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
| > | Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:147242
| > | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| > |
| > | Hi Jeffrey,
| > |
| > | > Yes, you can use singleton pattern to guarantee that there will only
| be
| > | one
| > | > instance running.
| > | > For more information, you can refer to:
| > | > http://www.codeguru.com/columns/VB/PK021102.html
| > |
| > | I have just taken a look at the article, very interesting. I also
tried
| > to
| > | implement it but I came across an obvious downfall, you can only have
1
| > | instance of a singleton per process, so if I were to make 2 consumers
of
| > the
| > | singleton they would both use a completely different instance. I
hadn't
| > | thought of this happening even though it is quite obvious, unless
there
| > is a
| > | way to share the singleton between processes?
| > |
| > | I suppose maybe what I am actually after is making a windows service,
| > *but*
| > | I have not yet seen any examples that show how you communicate with a
| > | windows service other than to stop or start etc. Would this require
| > | remoting? Or is there some simple method that I have missed somewhere
| > along
| > | the lines? Thanks for your help :-)
| > |
| > | Nick.
| > |
| > | --
| > |
| >
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| > | "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
| > |
| > | Fergus - September 5th 2003
| > |
| >
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| > | ""Jeffrey Tan[MSFT]"" <v-jetan@online.mi crosoft.com> wrote in message
| > | news:fDTfqp6kDH A.1548@cpmsftng xa06.phx.gbl...
| > | >
| > | > Hi Nak,
| > | >
| > |
| > | >
| > | > Also, I think it is easy for you to use process class to check the
| > | repeated
| > | > instance.
| > | > You can visit the link below for details:
| > | > http://www.syncfusion.com/FAQ/WinFor...c40c.asp#q550q
| > | >
| > | > Hope this helps,
| > | > Best regards,
| > | > Jeffrey Tan
| > | > Microsoft Online Partner Support
| > | > Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
| > | > This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
| > rights.
| > | >
| > | > --------------------
| > | > | From: "Nak" <a@a.com>
| > | > | Subject: Shared application
| > | > | Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:40:44 +0100
| > | > | Lines: 20
| > | > | X-Priority: 3
| > | > | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| > | > | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
| > | > | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
| > | > | Message-ID: <OyAnyN0kDHA.33 16@tk2msftngp13 .phx.gbl>
| > | > | Newsgroups: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| > | > | NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl213-218-228-203.as15444.net 213.218.228.203
| > | > | Path:
cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl!TK2MSFTNG P08.phx.gbl!tk2 msftngp13.phx.g bl
| > | > | Xref: cpmsftngxa06.ph x.gbl
| microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb:146979
| > | > | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.vb
| > | > |
| > | > | Hi there,
| > | > |
| > | > | In VB6 if I wanted to make a shared application so to speak I
| > would
| > | > | create an ActiveX EXE. This would allow me to expose objects of
the
| > | > | application but only have 1 instance loaded. What is the
equivilent
| > in
| > | > | VB.NET? Would I create a normal assembly that can be communicated
| > with
| > | > | using remoting? or are there other ways?
| > | > |
| > | > | Thanks in advance.
| > | > |
| > | > | Nick.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > |
| > | >
| > |
| >
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| > | > | "No matter. Whatever the outcome, you are changed."
| > | > |
| > | > | Fergus - September 5th 2003
| > | > |
| > | >
| > |
| >
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| > |
| >
|
|
|

Shared application

Shared application

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment