Hi all,
I want to execute a VB application from a ASP page (not .Net). Want I want
to do is
that I write some parameters to a database and then start the external
application that will pickup these parameters and run in the background. I
looked for a sample but I can't find any. Who can help me.
Many thanks
Tim
PS
Sorry for the multi posting if this is bothering you.
tim wrote on 16 jul 2007 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
> I want to execute a VB application from a ASP page (not .Net). Want I
> want to do is
> that I write some parameters to a database and then start the external
> application that will pickup these parameters and run in the
> background. I looked for a sample but I can't find any. Who can help
> me.
Set a variable, say in the database with the ASP,
and poll it with your external script or program.
> PS
> Sorry for the multi posting if this is bothering you.
I bothers me that you,
while you know it is not done,
and hopefully know why it is not done,
still say(!) you did multipost [no space].
Do you know the concept of crossposting?
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
Als je dan ook zo bij de hand bent om hier op te reageren verwacht ik dan
ook een zinnig antwoord op mijn vraag. Klaarblijkelijk heb je hier zeker dan
geen verstand van?
Het stoort mij dat mensen te snel een oordeel geven over iets wat niet
gewenst is maar wees dan een vent en kom dan met een zinne reactie dan
alleen deze.
Tim
"Evertjan."
news:Xns996FA3EC24D37eejj99@194.109.133.242...
> tim wrote on 16 jul 2007 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
>
>> I want to execute a VB application from a ASP page (not .Net). Want I
>> want to do is
>> that I write some parameters to a database and then start the external
>> application that will pickup these parameters and run in the
>> background. I looked for a sample but I can't find any. Who can help
>> me.
>
> Set a variable, say in the database with the ASP,
> and poll it with your external script or program.
>
>> PS
>> Sorry for the multi posting if this is bothering you.
>
> I bothers me that you,
> while you know it is not done,
> and hopefully know why it is not done,
> still say(!) you did multipost [no space].
>
> Do you know the concept of crossposting?
>
> --
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
tim wrote on 17 jul 2007 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
> "Evertjan."
> news:Xns996FA3EC24D37eejj99@194.109.133.242...
>> tim wrote on 16 jul 2007 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
>>
>>> I want to execute a VB application from a ASP page (not .Net). Want
>>> I want to do is
>>> that I write some parameters to a database and then start the
>>> external application that will pickup these parameters and run in
>>> the background. I looked for a sample but I can't find any. Who can
>>> help me.
>>
>> Set a variable, say in the database with the ASP,
>> and poll it with your external script or program.
>>
>>> PS
>>> Sorry for the multi posting if this is bothering you.
>>
>> I bothers me that you,
>> while you know it is not done,
>> and hopefully know why it is not done,
>> still say(!) you did multipost [no space].
>>
>> Do you know the concept of crossposting?
[Please do not toppost on usenet, Tim]
> Als je dan ook zo bij de hand bent om hier op te reageren verwacht ik
> dan ook een zinnig antwoord op mijn vraag. Klaarblijkelijk heb je hier
> zeker dan geen verstand van?
> Het stoort mij dat mensen te snel een oordeel geven over iets wat niet
> gewenst is maar wees dan een vent en kom dan met een zinne reactie dan
> alleen deze.
Tim is annoyed because he thinks he has a right ot a usefull answer on
usnet and he [wrongly, IMHO] does not think my answer is. Perhaps he
thinks usnet to be a paid helpdesk.
He is also annoyed that I reacted on his probable multiposting,
which he himself(!) brought up. Perhaps he really does not know the
concept of crossposting.
So be it.
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
"Evertjan." wrote:
>
> Perhaps he really does not know the
> concept of crossposting.
Would you provide this information about the
concept of crossposting?
â Jim Rodgers
=?Utf-8?B?SmltIFJvZGdlcnM=?= wrote on 22 jul 2007 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
> "Evertjan." wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps he really does not know the
>> concept of crossposting.
>
> Would you provide this information about the
> concept of crossposting?
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
Tim,
"Evertjan" briefly mention an idea that I use with great success.
Let me describe what I did, and you might find some aspects of
this will work well for you.
I have web pages where customers enter data that need to
be processed by another program â and this other program
does not play well with IIS (because the IIS "user" accounts
do not have user profiles, and for many other reasons). So,
this other process runs all the time in the background, and it
monitors the database where the web page puts the customers
data.
I can run this "background" program either in the foreground
(in other words, log-in to the server and run it) or in the
background (actually) by making it into an NT Service (which
is super easy, by the way). An NT Service keeps running even
if you log-out. Also, it can be set to auto-restart in the event
it terminates abnormally.
You _could_ run it on demand by launching the program from
your web page. I assume you would use the Windows
Scripting Host object to do this. But keep in mind what might
happen if multiuple users ran this at the same time: you will
have multiple instances of the "background" process running
as a result. In that case, you need to assure your system
does not run out of resources, and that the application will
run okay in multiple instances.
In my case, this is just another reason why the web page
cannot be talking directly to the background process. Instead,
I have the background process doing a query every 500ms
to see if there are any data to process. I have a table where
new "work" is posted, and one column in that table is a status
indicator. When the status column reads a certain value, the
background process takes care of it. I believe this is the kind
of thing "Evertjan" may have been suggesting.
Good luck,
Jim Rodgers
> tim wrote on 16 jul 2007 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
> >
> > I want to execute a VB application from a ASP page (not .Net). Want I
> > want to do is
> > that I write some parameters to a database and then start the external
> > application that will pickup these parameters and run in the
> > background.
"Evertjan." wrote:
>
> Set a variable, say in the database with the ASP,
> and poll it with your external script or program.
=?Utf-8?B?SmltIFJvZGdlcnM=?= wrote on 22 jul 2007 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
> "Evertjan." wrote:>
>> Set a variable, say in the database with the ASP,
>> and poll it with your external script or program.
> "Evertjan" briefly mention an idea that I use with great success.
> Let me describe what I did, and you might find some aspects of
> this will work well for you.
>
> I have web pages where customers enter data that need to
> be processed by another program " and this other program
> does not play well with IIS (because the IIS "user" accounts
> do not have user profiles, and for many other reasons). So,
> this other process runs all the time in the background, and it
> monitors the database where the web page puts the customers
> data.
>
> I can run this "background" program either in the foreground
> (in other words, log-in to the server and run it) or in the
> background (actually) by making it into an NT Service (which
> is super easy, by the way). An NT Service keeps running even
> if you log-out. Also, it can be set to auto-restart in the event
> it terminates abnormally.
>
> You _could_ run it on demand by launching the program from
> your web page. I assume you would use the Windows
> Scripting Host object to do this. But keep in mind what might
> happen if multiuple users ran this at the same time: you will
> have multiple instances of the "background" process running
> as a result. In that case, you need to assure your system
> does not run out of resources, and that the application will
> run okay in multiple instances.
>
> In my case, this is just another reason why the web page
> cannot be talking directly to the background process. Instead,
> I have the background process doing a query every 500ms
> to see if there are any data to process. I have a table where
> new "work" is posted, and one column in that table is a status
> indicator. When the status column reads a certain value, the
> background process takes care of it. I believe this is the kind
> of thing "Evertjan" may have been suggesting.
Wel yes, "Jim",
If the background programme is not interacting with the user-at-hand,
in the sense that the output is not needed for the next page or AjAX
transaction, it could be run every 30 seconds, every 5 minutes or even
twice a day. This could be easily skedueled by the/a skeduler outside the
influence of the IIS, so having none of the restrictions of the IIS-user.
I can imagine this non-interaction to be the case with a programme that
sends resulting emails that can wait some time to be sent or even are
ment to be sent at a later time, like the Google reminder service.
That way the problem of running multiple instances could be negligible.
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
"Evertjan." wrote:
> =?Utf-8?B?SmltIFJvZGdlcnM=?= wrote on 22 jul 2007 in
> microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
>
> Wel yes, "Jim",
>
> If the background programme is not interacting with the user-at-hand,
> in the sense that the output is not needed for the next page or AjAX
> transaction, it could be run every 30 seconds, every 5 minutes or even
> twice a day. This could be easily skedueled by the/a skeduler outside the
> influence of the IIS, so having none of the restrictions of the IIS-user.
>
> I can imagine this non-interaction to be the case with a programme that
> sends resulting emails that can wait some time to be sent or even are
> ment to be sent at a later time, like the Google reminder service.
>
> That way the problem of running multiple instances could be negligible.
>
Evertjan,
Right. That's what I was thinking. In the spirit of adding more
potentially useful information to this thread, I will elaborate
further on my example.
In the example I described, the service application polls every
0.25 seconds because user web page interaction -IS- required.
Still, I could not shell-out the "application" from the web page
because it is a single-threaded, single-user, multiple-document
interface type of program. Opening a second "copy" would
cause the application to start a user dialog box to say the
requested file already was open, etc. ...Not good behavior for
a web server. Thus, in my case, the application runs as an
auto-restarting NT service.
We are, as you would expect, planning to rewrite this software
as a true backend processor with only web browser interfaces.
The backend spawns simulataneous "jobs" in a scalable manner.
Meanwhile, the software we have now does work.
The web page interaction was yet another layer with
an IFRAME on the web page. Within the IFRAME the web page
polls the database every 1.0 seconds to see if its request has
been serviced. This reduces the web traffic a small amount,
but that's not the point. The IFRAME technique provides a way
for the user to see the progress of his request. The transaction
is, in fact, a very complex financial simulation that has many
stages and can require from 15 sec to 2 minutes to complete.
Obviously, this one feature cannot support very many users
simultaneously, but we charge out the wazoo for this service!
This is financing the re-write.
Of course, Tim has the option, I presume, to write his
application to fit his situation. Nevertheless, there are certain
advantages to choosing to write what is essentially a
"transaction processor" of a sort â comparable to what
some would refer to as a single-server queue. By time-
stamping the requests in the queue, one may can assure
consistent first-come / first-serve transactions when this
sort of thing is a requirement â like selling items from
inventory, etc. Also, if one needs to collect payment
before releasing the merchandise, having a backend
database also helps with payment processing â like with
PayPal.
I enjoy sharing these ideas, and I appreciate the feedback
others can provide. Hopefully this helps the entire group,
including the non-posting folks who are searching the
postings for answers to related question. Thank you,
Evertjan, for responding.
Cheers,
Jim Rodgers