We are considering to change our present .net2 on IIS6 server to .net4 (or 4.5). Can someone help us with some basics about this?
After we install .net4 to our production IIS. Is every .net site defaulting to .net4?
we have had some dificulties with 64-bit version so we have forced IIS6 to run in 32-bit mode. Does update do something to this? After installing .net4, how can we force specific application pool to operate on .net2 mode and on 32.bit mode?
What problems there might come out on transforming .net2 sites directly to .net 4 sites? Or is there any?
It's been a while since I've last used .NET, but here's my general suggestion.
First, Migrate to .NET 4! .NET 4 offers better security and new features. Consider that as your first option.
Second, in my experience, if you have multiple versions of framework installed on the server, you should be able to choose which version to operate that site.
Lastly, I'm not sure about 32/64 bit thing, but my suggestion is to simply fix it! Applications, especially heavy-load applications can operate better in 64-bit mode.
Make you application as future-proof as possible!
As for what problems you might run into, I really depends on what kind of APIs you're using, chances are, they will be a few deprecated methods, properties. Also, look at some new features, there might be new APIs worth trying, try that at a development server, it might increase overall user experience and even application performance.
Good luck!
Is every .net site defaulting to .net4?
When you add some website to IIS, it is assigned "DefaultAppPool" by default. So, it depends on what version of .NET framework set for your "DefaultAppPool". You can change application pool to target specific .NET framework.
After installing .net4, how can we force specific application pool to operate on .net2 mode
You can define more than one Application Pools in IIS targeting different .NET frameworks and then assign different Application Pools to different websites.
What problems there might come out on transforming .net2 sites directly to .net 4 sites? Or is there any?
I think it usually depends on your website; the libraries referenced, the patterns used, etc. No one can give you clear answer of it.
Related
So we have developed an application that uses the .net 4.0 full(extended) libraries. Our workstations only have .Net 4.0 client on them. Our applications and infrastructure teams are wary about having us deploy .Net 4.0 full to all the workstations and wants to take some time to discuss and test.
Is there some way to deploy the extra .Net Extended dlls with our application so we can go around this?
No, you cannot supplement with just the dlls. All you can do is update to the full profile or find the features in your app that require the full profile and re-write them to avoid that requirement.
There's actually not that much difference between the two profiles. See the answers to this question for a more complete explanation:
Client Profile vs Full
That means that you may have an easier time than you think either re-writing the app to avoid the features, or convincing your staff to update the profile deployed to the workstations. It's likely just some advanced WCF features or a type provided with ASP.Net (like HttpUtility) that you're missing.
I am developing a Remote Software Provisioning system that should be able to handle all deployment, installation, un-installation and upgrades of software components. Software can be in any language (java, .net, c/c++ etc) and target side can be PC, embedded systems and smart phones.
I have found Apache ACE as good candidate for developing this system.
I want to know if there is any advantage/necessity of using OSGi at target side as Apache ACE can do software provisioning to non-OSGi targets as well.
Having a modular framework like OSGi at the client side is a huge advantage when doing remote management, because it gives you much insight into what's happening inside - installed bundles, dependencies, states of the bundles, available services etc. This helps a lot when you have to solve a problem remotely. Another advantage is that OSGi basically forces programmers to develop proper modular and dynamic systems, which makes (remote) updating much easier.
So, if you have to decide now what language and framework to use for the client side, I strongly recommend OSGi for the embedded and mobile clients. For the PCs (I guess you mean desktop PCs?) this is probably not the best choice - it depends a lot what you want to achieve there. If you want to install MS Office remotely OSGi won't bring you forward ;)
However, if you already have existing programs at the client side and are discussing whether to convert them to OSGi, I would recommend to investigate some time first to see whether they can be converted easily. Some software packages could give you a lot of trouble converting to OSGi, not because OSGi is complex, but because the program itself is not modular and has a lot of assumptions about the static nature of the environment (e.g. nothing ever disappears, parts of the system never get updated etc.). The irony in the matter is that these are exactly the programs which will give you most trouble later anyway no matter which remote provisioning system you chose.
If you have OSGi at some of the targets be sure to use a remote provisioning system which gives you access to the full OSGi functionality and not only the most basic and simple install and update functions. I haven't yet used Apache ACE, but I have experience with another provisioning system - mPower Remote Manager. Here are some snapshots from the documentation which can give you a feeling what is possible with OSGi as a base - you can draw your own conclusions whether it will be useful for your case or not.
I've given some examples in the other question you asked:
What are the non-osgi targets with which Apache ACE can work
You can write your own management agent that talks to the ACE server and installs artifacts. There actually are a couple of places where you could hook in your own code and protocol. Is there a concrete language/environment you're thinking of using, or are you just exploring the possibilities right now?
Well, the advantages of OSGi haven't changed, so for that I can refer you to the standard page.
To be a bit more constructive, I'll read the question as 'Should I bother converting my application to OSGi, as it is not necessary for ACE?'
I think that depends on what 'kind' of updating mechanism you're after. If you have a monolithical application (at least from the provisioning perspective) which you deploy and update only as a whole (Like an iOS app) then there isn't much to gain for provisioning purposes by using OSGi.
For the rest I can tell you the same as I tell anybody else: Converting an application to OSGi isn't hard, but modularizing code can be a nightmare, but something you'll need to face at some point, OSGi or not. If your code is modularized already, using OSGi should be a piece of cake.
Is Mono appropriate for developing server applications, or only desktop applications? I'd like to develop server applications in C# for Linux. I want to write a First Person Shooter (FPS) game in C#/XNA, and I've a Linux dedicated server. But this question is generally for all types of server applications...
Mono handles ASP.NET (including ASP.NET MVC) quite well. Most other server implementations work very well, as well. It does depend, slightly, on what exactly you are trying to serve, and how you are going to use it.
Mono also supports WCF directly in the core, which allows most non-web service applications to be written very effectively.
Edit:
Given your edit, and your desire to handle the server side of a multi-player FPS game, Mono should work fine. You will likely want to avoid using the high level interfaces like WCF and ASP.NET, and go straight to the System.Net namespace (depends a bit on how many players you'll be synchronizing, but if it's large, you'll want speed here over ease). Mono supports this quite well.
That being said, Mono's support of the System.Net namespace is very good, and quite mature, so you should have no problems using it for the server side of a multiplayer FPS game.
I don't see why not. I believe FogBugz uses Mono to deploy to apache servers.
Here is a conversation about running the FogBugz application on mono as an example of having a server app running on it.
It looks like your needs cover a broad range of different applications.
I think the overall answer would be yes, Mono is appropriate for developer server applications.
As others have pointed out, Mono has ASP.NET support as well as WCF built-in.
You also have the ability of working directly down to the Socket level if you need to squeeze every last bit of performance out of your server application (although you'll have to figure out how to persist state if the need is there).
I'd definitely be interested in seeing the performance difference of something like that between the two platforms (I wouldn't expect much difference...it's possible that Mono might even get slightly better performance because of the rest of the *NIX stack).
I am just curious to know the reason why it's not possible to host an ASP.Net web service other then IIS ? While in WCF it's possible to host a service in IIS, WAS or any console application.
Please clear the doubt..
ASP.NET is actually not specifically bound to IIS. The .NET Framework includes an HttpRuntime which may be used to write a custom hosting platform. You could easily write a console application, like you can for WCF, that will provide the ASP.NET runtime without IIS.
Technically speaking, you could also write an Apache module that hooked into either a separate .NET process hosting the ASP.NET HttpRuntime, or possibly hook directly into a .NET assembly. I don't know much about writing extensions to Apache, however assuming you can bridge the Apache unmanage to .NET managed gap, you would be able to host ASP.NET in Apache (which should be possible, you might need a native & managed C++ library to mediate.)
Microsoft's .NET framework is amazingly extensible. You can pretty much achieve whatever you set your mind to, if you have the will and the time (and perhaps the funds.) However, the .NET platform does encapsulate an immense amount of functionality, and it is up to Microsoft to choose how they spend their money. Naturally, they have their own business to worry about, and I would not expect them to expend tremendous amounts of money giving a leading edge to their competitors (it would be bad business, and quite a disappointing competitive practice, if you ask me.)
What is a better platform/language for developing Windows/desktop based application that can run offline (sometimes)? .NET (C#, ASP) or Java or any other development tool? This application requires to store data into a database(involves some GIS) and later Synch both ways with the main server (SQL/Oracle) during off hours or when initiated by a user or event or when online? ALso the tool/IDE recommended should allow us in the future to migrate this desktop application as a Web based application to the corporate server with less pain or re-work when internet/nw access is available to all of our remote sites/users. Any input/advice is appreciated.
If you are strictly doing Windows desktop application development, C# or VB.NET would be an excellent choice. There is a ton of documentation out there for .NET developers. Although the framework is a free download from Microsoft, any serious work is cumbersome and tedious without the IDE.
If you needed the potential to support your application on multiple operating systems besides Microsoft Windows, then I think it might be worth looking into Java.
For web solutions, in .NET you have ASP.NET, Java you have JSP and Tomcat.
You could try Adobe AIR. It seems like it would serve most of your desktop needs and it should be the easiest to migrate into a web app (Flex).
C#/WPF for desktop with Silverlight, XBAP or even ASP as the online options.
Since you mentioned the desire to web-enable this application at some point I'd look into Silverlight. Out-of-browser capabilities were introduced in Silverlight 3. That means that the app can run directly on the desktop, and the internet connection is optional. However, when the internet connection is available it has built-in support for auto-updating itself.
And now in Silverlight 4 it's possible to run an out-of-browser Silverlight app with elevated trust. Silverlight 4 also finally introduced things like right-click support, clipboard access, full keyboard support in fullscreen mode, etc. So if you're just now starting development, I'd most definitely use version 4.
You'll have to communicate with something like a WCF service for a lot of the database operations. But going with Silverlight should allow you to build something that'll work on the desktop and the web alike without having to manage two systems.
Going web-based after you already developed a desktop application is a really bad idea. There is no reason the desktop application cannot use a internet connection, and be updated from a server.
You could try Delphi. It's a rapid application development tool. Very different, but very quick to use. Well suited to Oracle integration. Data sync is probably going to need to be custom, unless you're using something like Sybase SQL Anywhere.