|
Every 32-bit process can allocate up to 4GB of virtual memory, where some goes to kernel-mode and some to user-mode.
I currently have 60 processes running on my computer. Lets say they all want to consume 4GB of memory, will I have almost 240GB of memory allocated from my HD for all the processes?
What if I don't have 240GB available, but only 200? will some processes won't recieve their promised 4GB? What will become of them once they won't recieve the memory they need because there isn't enough available?
Now lets say I have 240GB available, will each process access its virtual memory as fast as accessing its RAM, as it is supposed to be?
I find it very hard to believe that hunderds of GB are expected to be available for allocating virtual memory on every one's HD, and I find it even harder to believe that accessing that virtual memory will be as fast access as accessing RAM.
Any enlightment regarding this issue will be most welcome, as I am well confused at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey guys,
I programmed a tool which sends a WOL packet to boot a Client.
3 devices:
1. laptop (at home)
2. Server
3. Desktop PC
I connect with the laptop to the network with vpn. So I can reach the server, but not the desktop.
I have to turn on the desktop pc to run a remote software from laptop to reach the client.
But now the problem:
I can not boot desktop pc from laptop! So I have the application on a server which both can reach.
There are 2 .exe
1. starter.exe (start the WOL.exe on server)
2. WOL.exe (send WOL message to desktop pc)
How can I start the WOL.exe local on the server? (If I run it with the starter.exe it would run local on the Laptop)
greets,
Mschauder
modified on Thursday, July 15, 2010 12:54 AM
|
|
|
|
|
The simplest answer would be to send some message to the server that includes the parameter information. The server will recognise the message and construct a WOL packet which it then sends to the requisite IP address. Or did I misunderstand your question?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
you don't! but how can I do this? 
Is it possible to start the .exe local on the server? Cause Client A send his information to the server, the server start my program now... but local on the machine from Client A...
Client A can not reach Client B directly.
If I can start the .exe on the server I have no problems 
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: Is it possible to start the .exe local on the server?
Sorry but I don't understand your question. As I understand your original problem, you want client A to send a message to the server, the server will then send a WOL message to client B. From that point on both A & B can communicate with the server.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
A & B can communicate to the server.
A can not communicate to B (directly).
A send information to Server (with .exe which start a .exe that send WOL packet to B)
Server starts .exe with WOL packet to B
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: A & B can communicate to the server.
A can not communicate to B (directly).
A send information to Server (with .exe which start a .exe that send WOL packet to B)
Server starts .exe with WOL packet to B
Which is what I said.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
possible, sry =)
english is not my native language 
do you have an idea how I can solve this? 
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: english is not my native language
No problem, we try to help everyone.
Mschauder wrote: do you have an idea how I can solve this?
I think you need to try and explain your problem again as I cannot see where your difficulty lies. You keep mentioning something about ".exe on server" but I cannot see what that means.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
ok lets try again!
I sit at home with a laptop.
The laptop is connected to a server.
Then I want connect with my PC at work (Remote).
But my PC is turned off when I go home.
So I have to turn it on.
So I develop for our users a application that they only have to start 1 icon.
the *.exe works if I have a direct link to the other client.
So they start the "WOL_starter.exe" local on the laptop.
the "WOL_starter.exe" should start the "WakeonLAN.exe" on the SERVER with the parameter (IP or MAC).
But if "WOL_starter.exe" start the "WakeonLAN.exe" this .exe will start local on the laptop and the laptop had no direct link to the Client.
I hope this will help !
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I think we are making progress:
Laptop (user) ----> Server ----> Desktop (remote)
- Laptop: runs
WOL_starter.exe [IP address of Desktop] - Laptop:
WOL_starter.exe program sends message with IP address to the server - Server: receives message (from Laptop) with IP address
- Server: sends WOL message to IP address (Desktop)
- Desktop: wakes up, boots and is ready ...
- Laptop: ?
Mschauder wrote: But if "WOL_starter.exe" start the "WakeonLAN.exe" this .exe will start local on the laptop and the laptop had no direct link to the Client.
This statement I do not understand, did I miss something?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
1. Laptop: runs WOL_starter.exe
2. Server runs WakeonLAN.exe
3. Desktop boot
4. Laptop use remote-desktop on the Desktop pc
There are 2 *.exe --
1. WOL_starter.exe -> *.exe on the Laptop -> communicate to the server and start "WakeonLAN.exe" with parameter IP.
2. WakeonLAN.exe -> *.exe on the server -> send WOL message to the Desktop PC
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so we both agree on the sequence of operations and where the programs are, but now I am more confused: what is the problem?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Well...
1. If the Laptop start the WOL_starter.exe the WOL_starter runs WakeonLAN.exe (from server) local on the laptop and this laptop can't communicate to the desktop PC!  so some error occurs.
The User (Laptop) just should start my starter.exe and his desktop should turn on. They have no permission to connect to server via remote.
The server should start his program on his system not on the Laptop
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: 1. If the Laptop start the WOL_starter.exe the WOL_starter runs WakeonLAN.exe (from server) local on the laptop and this laptop can't communicate to the desktop PC!
This does not makes sense; how can the server start a program that runs on the laptop?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
starter.exe send parameter to the wol.exe on the server and start it.
But if I start the starter.exe local on my laptop, the WOL.exe will run there, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: starter.exe send parameter to the wol.exe on the server and start it.
But if I start the starter.exe local on my laptop, the WOL.exe will run there, too.
These two statements are mutually exclusive; if statement 1 is true how can statement 2 also be true?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
wuah 
again:
I sit with my laptop in the sun, enjoy the sun connect to network with vpn.
Now I have a connectivity to the Server.
I want to work Remote on my desktop pc from work. But the desktop pc is turned off.
Now I want to start my desktop pc to connect to it!
I start "starter.exe" and my desktop pc turns on.
-----
Now how I realize this:
I have 2 .exe
1. starter.exe is on my laptop
2. WOL.exe is on the server
-----
Now how my tool works:
starter.exe start the WOL.exe on the server with IP or MAC adress from my desktop pc as a parameter.
WOL.exe sends a magic packet to desktop and this turns on!
-----
Problem:
starter.exe starts on my laptop
starter.exe starts wol.exe which lay on the server
but if starter.exe start wol.exe, wol.exe will be started on my laptop instead of the server.
And cause my laptop is in an another subnet my laptop can not root packets directly.
I hope this would help 
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: I hope this would help
Well you still seem to be saying: "I do this and it works". Then you say: "I do this and it does not work".
So where are we? Let us go back to the original sequence.
- Laptop: run starter.exe (on the laptop)
- Laptop: starter.exe sends a message to the server with the IP address of the desktop
- Laptop: starter.exe terminates - its work is done
- Server: receives the message and runs wol.exe (on the server) with the desktop IP address as parameter
- Server: wol.exe sends a WOL message to the IP address of the desktop
- Server: wol.exe terminates - its work is done
- Desktop: receives WOL message and boots
- Laptop, Server and Desktop are now all booted and ready for action
Or maybe this is not what happens?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't work...
I try to describe like you :P
1. Laptop: run starter.exe
2. Laptop: starter.exe start wol.exe with ip adress of the desktop
3. Laptop: starter.exe terminates
now the problem begin
4. Because starter.exe runs wol.exe the wol.exe will run on the laptop...
what should do:
4. Server: runs wol.exe
5. Desktop: boots
6. Laptop: connect to desktop and is ready for action
---
for example
sitting in school your neighbour looks bored then you start a program like media player and this program should pop up on HIS screen not yours!
If I start media player (installed on his desktop pc) it will pop up on my screen, this I wouldn't have...
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: 4. Because starter.exe runs wol.exe the wol.exe will run on the laptop...
Well this is obviously wrong. As I showed in my previous posts starter.exe should send a message to the server with the IP address, the server then runs wol.exe to send the WOL message to the desktop machine.
Mschauder wrote: sitting in school your neighbour looks bored then you start a program like media player and this program should pop up on HIS screen not yours!
I'm not sure exactly how you would do this unless you have some program running on your neighbour's PC that will accept commands and act on them. In general this is considered to be hacking and is not encouraged.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Well...
... thanks a lot but you don't know what I mean 
I solved this otherwise
3 *.exe
1. starter.exe
*new* 2. RemoteStarter.exe (some Telnet function to start Software on other systems)
3. WOL.exe
There is no other solution...
or how would you solve something like this when a user is not allowed to use VNC to view the server.
And they know nothing about wake on LAN 
|
|
|
|
|
Mschauder wrote: thanks a lot but you don't know what I mean
I think I do.
Mschauder wrote: or how would you solve something like this when a user is not allowed to use VNC to view the server.
And they know nothing about wake on LAN
I would not solve it. If you are not allowed access to the server then you should not try to hack into it.
Case closed, I think.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody try to hack into it...
its just ja medium that both (Laptop & desktop) can reach...
But would you give an user the chance to "play" on a server? 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
