I have a server/client architecture where the client hits the ASP.NET server's service at a certain host name, IP address, and port. Without thinking, I logged on to the server and set up permanent HTTP301 redirection through IIS from that service to another URL that the machine handles via IIS (same IP and port), mistakenly thinking it was another site that is hosted there. When the client hit the server at the old host name, it cached the permanent redirect. Now, even though I have removed the redirection, the client no longer uses the old address. How can I clear the client's cache so that it no longer stores the redirect?
I have read about how permanent HTTP301 can be, but in this case, it should be possible to reset a single client's knowledge of the incorrectly-learned host name.
Long ago, I created an ASPNET user for development use.However, every time I boot up my dev system, I'm presented with a user login for ASPNET, among others.I don't want to remove ASPNET; I need it for dev work.But how do I keep it from appearing among the list of User Logins available at boot-up?
We have a wfc layer that wraps the business classes and database access and use a client that lives on the database layer. Amongst our group we are attempting to form standards. Some want to have the client call the web method and pass the page they are requesting and the page size. Pass that to the database and then page in SQL Server use RowNum.Some want to cache the full list of objects in http cache on the service tier and page in memory. They concern here is memory use on the server.
Which would be best for a medium number of users with potentially large number of records to manage (say 30K) Is it better to cache them all in memory and work from there or page at the database as the application scales?
Since I don't want my sessions to be removed unless the session has been abandoned either via code or Session Timeout...For eviction, I would think "None" and for expireable, I would think False.I have tested and calling Session.Abandon does remove the object from the cache. I have also tested to see if by extending my session, the session object in cache is also extended. This does seem to work the "correct" way.
We have a data driven ASP.NET website which has been written using the standard pattern for data caching (adapted here from MSDN):
public DataTable GetData() { string key = "DataTable"; object item = Cache[key] as DataTable;
[code]...
The trouble with this is that the call to GetDataFromSQL() is expensive and the use of the site is fairly high. So every five minutes, when the cache drops, the site becomes very 'sticky' while a lot of requests are waiting for the new data to be retrieved.
What we really want to happen is for the old data to remain current while new data is periodically reloaded in the background. (The fact that someone might therefore see data that is six minutes old isn't a big issue - the data isn't that time sensitive). This is something that I can write myself, but it would be useful to know if any alternative caching engines (I know names like Velocity, memcache) support this kind of scenario. Or am I missing some obvious trick with the standard ASP.NET data cache?
we have so many parameters that the cache key is several hundred characters long. is there a limit to the length of these cache keys? Internally, it is using a dictionary, so theoretically the lookup time should be constant. However, I wonder if we have potential to run into some performance/memory problem.
I have use Nhibernate in my MVC Project by me known, Nhibernate have cache on Session and Object. now, I want use HttpContext.Current.Cache (system.web) for cache data something in project. my code same that have problem, haven't it. and that's right or wrong.
I've got a web application that runs of a state server. It looks like soon it may need to distributed and there will be two web servers behind a load balancer.
This works great for session state but my next challenge is Cache
My application leverages heavily of cache. I understand ASP.Net 4.0 will be offering more here but nothing much has been said about the how too.
There are two challenges that I face
1). Each webserver will have its own copy of cache whereas it would be more efficient to put this to a third server the same as session state is put to state server.
2). The real challenge is keeping cache in sync if a simple dataset derived from the database is changed my code dumps that cache item and reloads the cache. That's all well on one webserver but webserver number two wont know to drop that particular cache item and reload it. This could cause some unexpected problems in the application.
For scenario number 2 I could attempt to do some smart coding so server number two knows to dump the cache and reload it.
My guess is someone else has already been here before and there's probably a better implementation approach rather than writing extra code.
Does anyone know how I could achieve the goal of keeping Cache in sync between multiple webservers or even better farm Cache management to another server?
I need to enable caching in my asp.net application, but I do not want to use the webserver's memory for holding cache objects. If I add the page directive for output caching will the page be stored in the asp.net cache object?
I want to be able to maintain certain objects between application restarts.
To do that, I want to write specific cached items out to disk in Global.asax Application_End() function and re-load them back on Application_Start().
I currently have a cache helper class, which uses the following method to return the cached value:
return HttpContext.Current.Cache[key];
Problem: during Application_End(), HttpContext.Current is null since there is no web request (it's an automated cleanup procedure) - therefore, I cannot access .Cache[] to retrieve any of the items to save to disk.
Question: how can I access the cache items during Application_End()?
Im building a image gallery which reads file from disk, create thumbnails on the fly and present them to the user. This works good, except the processing takes a bit time.
I then decided to cache the processed images using the ASP .NET Application Cache. When a image is processed I add the byte[] stream to the cache. As far as I know this is beeing saved into the system memory. And this is working perfect, the loading of the page is much faster.
My question is if there are thousands of images which gets cached in the Application Cache, will that affect the server performance in any way?
You know I have the way to Cache the data I've got from the SQL Server over data caching. In addition I can output cache web user controls.Whats about a web user control contains data from a SQL database? Does it make sense to cache the data and also cache the control?What is the best solution for the combination of these two components?
I have a server control that I developed which generates navigation based on a third party CMS API. Currently I am caching this control using the PartialCaching attribute. The CMS uses cache key dependencies to invalidate the cache when a user makes an edit, however in the case of my server control it does not get invalidated and the updated navigation will not show up until the cache expiration set by the PartialCaching attribute.Here is my two part question:
What is the proper way to programmatically cache a server control, without using the PartialCaching attribute, and adding a cache key dependency?
Is it possible to continue to use the PartialCaching attribute and add a cache key dependency?
I'm using the OutputCache for my pages, and I have a dynamic user control (login/register) . When the user try to sign in, the the control do not change the aspect because I´m using OutputCache. How can I exclude the "login/register" control from the cache?
The following text coming from database. In that i need only content , and not needed script content. how can i remove script via c#.net? Leaving behind to mourn her loss are her loving husband Edward T. Safer Sr.; her sons Edward T. Safer Jr. and his wife Lori of Galloway and Robert J. Safer and his wife Doreen of West Milford; her daughter Ruth Ellen Ward and her husband Stan of West Caldwell; four sisters Doris Cabany and Renee McCoy of Grantville, Ga., Beverly Judge of Seattle, Washington and Margaret Graber of Pompton Lakes; ten grandchildren Samantha, Marissa, Rachel, Dylan, Casey, E.J., Kali, Robert, Shannon and Jonathan.
Funeral services will be held at the Vander May Wayne Colonial Funeral Home, 567 Ratzer Road, Wayne on Tuesday, February 23, 2010 at 10 AM. Friends may visit with the family at the funeral home on Monday, February 22nd from 2-4, 7-9 PM. Those planning an expression of sympathy in Ruth's memory are asked to consider The Passaic Valley Hospice, 783 N . Riverview Dr., Totowa, NJ 07512
I am trying to get a simple multi-page program to run correctly. I have everything set up, except for the "remove" function. When I try to remove an item from the list box nothing happens. Insted of trying to explain it I will show you the code...
i have one dataset that populates some values like value1, value2, value3, value1, value3, etc. And i am showing this values in a dropdown list. But my requirement is that i have to show the same value once. That is the dropdown should be display like this, value1, value2, value3. Not repeat the existing value.
I been using Session.clear() and I noticed in firecookie that the session still exists. So I started to google around and found there are 4 ways to remove a session
Session.Remove(strSessionName); Remove an Item from Session State Collection Session.RemoveAll() Remove all items from session collection Session.Clear() Remove all items from session collection Note: There is no difference between Clear and RemoveAll. RemoveAll() calls Clear(), internally. Session.Abandon() Cancels the Current Session
Now clear and remove seem to do the same thing but which one should you be using like why use remove() over abandon over clear.
Like if you use session.Abandon it kills the current session. Where clear() removes the values.
Why would you only want to keep the session around with no values in it? Why not just kill it completely?