Is it possible to transfer files through FTP using the library above in an ACTIVE FTP mode?
It takes my app 13 seconds to move the 5KB file over - when I traced the code, turned out that the majority of these 13 seconds is spent on "sleeping" : time between "entering passive mode: 227" and "data transfer started", it was a good 8 seconds.
Any way to use this lib differently? I just use GetFile function as is.
Sorry, I don't know anything about OpenNETCF's FTP component.
We're using the FTP/FTPS component (commercial) by Rebex (http://www.rebex.net). It's really great! If you can spend a few bucks, I'd suggest to give it a try.
The main problem with that lib (if it is the one i'm thinking of) is the sync comms implemented via sleeps and yes you can sleep for longer than necessary. Is it socket based? I forget but on some (all?) CE devices you can't sync send with a timeout which means you write code that can hang (no timeout) so sleeps are actually the better bet in this scenario!!!???!!!.
I did ground-up rewrite this lib to be async but the client on that one wouldn't allow me to contribute the code back. :(
If it is the one with the source up on the open net cf forums then just grab the code and reduce the sleeps if your network is teh awesomes, the issue with this kind of solution is that you might "miss" a success if your sleep is too short or the network gets a little clogged up as you didn't wait long enough before touching your receive buffer.
Failing that rewrite with async or look elsewhere!
Related
I was able to make a working HID USB stack on my "StartUSB for PIC" board for the 18F2550 microcontroller. I based it on one of the MLA libraries, which was made for the 18F45K50 (MLA 2018_11_26, hid_custom, picdem_fs_usb_k50.x), but I converted it to work with the 18F2550 (there might have been easier ways, but only learned to work with PIC about 1 month ago). On the host side, I'm using LibUsbDotNet (also here, there might be easier ways - the documentation on this library really sucks) on a Windows 10 machine.
I'm using the HID class, full speed, and all seems to work. Although, I get some random errors on the host PC (see below), but doing one close/re-open cycle on the host side when getting the error is kind of solving it. Dirty, but it works. So I kind of ignore this now.
Win32Error:Win32Error:GetOverlappedResult Ep 0x01
995:The I/O operation has been aborted because of either a thread exit or an application request.
I'm not an expert on USB (yet). But all examples I'm seeing are based on 1) you send first a command to the device and 2) then you retrieve the answer from the device. I did some performance tests, and see that this indeed shows that I can do about 500 cycles/second. I think that is correct, because each cycle, sending command and retrieving answer, each takes 1 msec.
But do I really need to send a command? Can't I just keep reading endlessly, and when the device has somthing to say, it does send the data in an IN transaction, and when not it ignores which creates a timeout on the host side. That would mean that I can poll at 1000 cycles/second? Unfortunately, I have tried it by changing my implementation on the PIC, but I get very weird results. I think I have issues with suspend mode. That brings me to another question - how can I make the device get out of suspend mode (means that not the host, but the device should be triggering this event). I have searched the MLA library for command such as "wakeup", "resume", ... but couldn't find anything.
So, to summarize, 2 questions:
Conceptual: Can I send data from device to host without being requested for it by a command from the host?
For PIC experts: How can I have a device trigger for a wakeup from suspend mode?
And indeed, the answer is Yes on the first question.
In the meantime, I found another link on the web that contains a Visual Studio C# implementation of a USB library including all the source files.
If you're interested, this is the link
This C# host implementation works as a charm. Without sending a command to the device, I get notified immediately if a button is pressed. Great!
It also proofs that my earlier device implementation based on the original MicroChip MLA, is 100% correct. I stress tested the implementation by sending a "toggle LED command" as fast as I could, and I reach 1000 commands/second. Again great!
I think that LibUsbDotNet isn't that perfect after all. As I wrote above, I get rather unstable communication (Win32Error). But with this implementation, I don't get a single error, even after running for half an hour # 1000 commands/second.
So for me, case closed.
I wonder what techniques would you use when, say a page contains links to 6 videos, 300Mb each and you want to download them all. Should I write my custom downloader?
I'm used to use MediaPipeline but it utilizes the framework scheduler which has the following issues:
You never know which file is currently being downloaded
You have no idea on download progress/state until it fails
Strange timeout behaviour:
a) Looks like timeout is applied to the whole request download operation, not only to pauses in download. So, say, having a timeout of 5min I will never be able to download a file which takes 6 min to download. b) If you make 5 concurrent long requests and one of them is taking too long, you will get all of them (not complete yet) timed out. You have to limit the number of concurrent requests by 1 in settings (which will affect the whole spider).
You can make use of Youtube downloader after having retrieve links to the videos.
Youtube downloader will try to continue if video has not finished downloading. You can also force it to continue. Write a wrapper around it for concurrency if it takes long for single downloads.
Disclaimer: I am not in anyway affiliated with the maintainers of this package.
FYI: This will be my first real foray into Async/Await; for too long I've been settling for the familiar territory of BackgroundWorker. It's time to move on.
I wish to build a WCF service, self-hosted in a Windows service running on a remote machine in the same LAN, that does this:
Accepts a request for a single .ZIP archive
Creates the archive and packages several files
Returns the archive as its response to the request
I have to support archives as large as 10GB. Needless to say, this scenario isn't covered by basic WCF designs; we must take additional steps to meet the requirement. We must eliminate timeouts while the archive is building and memory errors while it's being sent. Both of these occur under basic WCF designs, depending on the size of the file returned.
My plan is to proceed using task-based asynchronous WCF calls and streaming mode.
I have two concerns:
Is this the proper approach to the problem?
Microsoft has done a nice job at abstracting all of this, but what of the underlying protocols? What goes on 'under the hood?' Does the server keep the connection alive while the archive is building (could be several minutes) or instead does it close the connection and initiate a new one once the operation is complete, thereby requiring me to properly route the request through the client machine firewall?
For #2, clearly I'm hoping for the former (keep-alive). But after some searching I'm not easily finding an answer. Perhaps you know.
You need streaming for big payloads. That is the right approach. This has nothing at all to do with asynchronous IO. The two are independent. The client cannot even tell that the server is async internally.
I'll add my standard answers for whether to use async IO or not:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/25087273/122718 Why does the EF 6 tutorial use asychronous calls?
https://stackoverflow.com/a/12796711/122718 Should we switch to use async I/O by default?
Each request runs over a single connection that is kept alive. This goes for both streaming big amounts of data as well as big initial delays. Not sure why you are concerned about routing. Does your router kill such connections? That's a problem.
Regarding keep alive, there is nothing going over the wire to do that. TCP sessions can stay open indefinitely without any kind of wire traffic.
I am using the UI Automation COM-to-.NET Adapter to read the contents of the target Google Chrome browser that plays a FLASH content on Windows 7. It works.
I succeeded to get the content and elements. Everything works fine for some time but after few hours the elements become inaccessible.
The (AutomationElement).FindAll() returns 0 children.
Is there any internal undocumented Timeout used by UIAutomation ?
According to this IUIAutomation2 interface
There are 2 timeouts but they are not accessible from IUIAutomation interface.
IUIAutomation2 is supported only on Windows 8 (desktop apps only).
So I believe there is some timeout.
I made a workaround that restarts the searching and monitoring of elements from the beginning of the desktop tree but the elements are still not available.
After some time (not sure how much) the elements are available again.
My requirements are to read the values all the time as fast as possible but this behavior makes a damage to the whole architecture.
I read somewhere that there is some timeout of 3 minutes but not sure.
if there is a timeout, is it possible to change it ?
Is it possible to restart something or release/dispose something ?
I can't find anything on MSDN.
Does anybody have any idea what is happening and how to resolve ?
Thanks for this nicely put question. I have a similar issue with a much different setup. I'm on Win7, using UIAutomationCore.dll directly from C# to test our application-under-development. After running my sequence of actions & event subscriptions and all the other things, I intermittently observe that the UIA interface stops working (about 8-10min in my case, but I'm heavily using the UIA interface).
Many different things including dispatching the COM interface, sleeping at different places failed. The funny revelation was I managed to use the AccEvent.exe (part of SDK like inspect.exe) during the test and saw that events also stopped flowing to AccEvent, too. So it wasn't my client's interface that stopped, but it was rather the COM-server (or whatever the UIAutomationCore does) that stopped responding.
As a solution (that seems to work most of the time - or improve the situation a lot), I decided I should give the application-under-test some breathing point, since using the UIA puts additional load on it. This could be a smartly-put sleep points in your client, but instead of sleeping a set time, I'm monitoring the processor load of the application and waiting until it settles down.
One of the intermittent errors I receive when the problem manifests itself is "... was unable to call any of the subscribers..", and my search resulted in an msdn page saying they have improved things on CUIAutomation8 interface, but as this is Windows8 specific, I didn't have the chance to try that yet.
I should also add that I also reduced the number of calls to UIA by incorporating more ui caching (FindAllBuildCache), as the less the frequency of back-and-forth the better it is for the uia. Thanks to the answer of Guy in another question: UI Automation events stop being received after a while monitoring an application and then restart after some time
First of all I'm developing my own C# library for controlling Philips Hue, which means I'm not using the official SDK. (I'm guessing that the SDK will make sure you won't have any problems)
I'm a little confused about the limitation in the Core concepts page in the API, which states:
We can’t send commands to the lights too fast. If you stick to around 10 commands per second to the /lights resource as maximum you should be fine. For /groups commands you should keep to a maximum of 1 per second.
I intend to respect this limitation, but does the limitation still apply when you are performing GET requests on the /lights resource, or is it only for sending actual commands with PUT requests to /lights/<id>/state that change the state of the light? Same question goes for the /groups resource.
Also is it even possible to damage anything by sending too many requests, or will it just take longer to get all responses?
Edit:
My overall question is: How should I understand the API limitation?
A more specific sub-question is: Should I wait 100 ms before sending another /lights command, relative to when I received a response, or relative to when I sent the previous command?
Another sub-question is: Should I consider this limitation only when using PUT requests on e.g. /lights/<id>/state, or on all request types GET/PUT/POST/DELETE
I don't know if anything was changed in firmware updates, but I have discovered that the bridge might not be so simple as you would think, and that the API description isn't very clear.
I've done a little testing while running firmware 01009914.
The bridge seems to have some kind of queue of incoming commands. I sent {"bri":254} to a group 9 times and 1 final command of {"bri":1}. From the first command to when the light is actually dimmed, takes roughly 3-4 seconds. Each time I sent a command the bridge replied almost instantly with success token.
I did the same small tests sending other commands, 10 of each JSON object:
{"bri":254} 3-4 seconds
{"on":true, "bri":254} 6-7 seconds
{"on":true, "bri":254, "alert":"none", "effect":"none"} 12-13 seconds
This actually shows that each change of attributes takes roughly 0.3 seconds for the bridge to handle.
I will claim that for each attribute we change, the bridge takes about 300 ms to finish, and the limitation of commands should be understood as: As long as you stick with changing one attribute of a group each second, you should be fine.
Note: I only tried with one group consisting of three lights, and I don't know if the bridge actually does have a queue of incoming commands, and in case it does have a queue, I don't know what the limit of items in it is.
Edit:
Now we have some official clarification of the Hue System Performance.
I'm fairly certain that the 10 commands per second is a guideline to prevent failure of the Bridge, and is a technical limitation of the hardware. Any more than that and you're apt to overload the bridge. I believe this applies to commands as well as requests.
Both approaches are reasonable. For laziness' sake, you could wait for 100ms to send a response, but I would only rely on this method if you don't plan on any other interactions with the Bridge.
I consider this limitation on all request types.
You won't damage anything if you send commands too fast. However, if you send commands too fast the bridge might become unresponsive and/or some messages can be ignored.
When it comes to the bridge, the way I think of it is that the bridge is more or less single threaded, so it works best if you make sure you don't send the next command before the previous one has returned.
In practice we've found that this works much better than waiting a fixed time between each request. In fact, you can pretty much send commands as fast as you want as long as you wait for the previous one to finish.
When you send a command to the bridge, the bridge has to then send it to the lamps through Zigbee. Since it's a mesh network in some cases the message has to make a couple of hops from lamp to lamp before it reaches the target. Depending on how many lamps you have and how many hops the signal needs to take, this can take a while. Also, it's possible that some messages randomly take much longer than others.
In general the system is not designed to handle very fast changes, but if you keep the above in mind you can make many cool effects :)