Thanks Jeremy for your update... an interesting piece of information.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Jeremy Byron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Grr...stupid spell checker. That's supposed to be "handle other
> remoting requests", not "removing requests"
>
> Jeremy
>
> -Original Message-
Grr...stupid spell checker. That's supposed to be "handle other
remoting requests", not "removing requests"
Jeremy
-Original Message-
From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeremy Byron
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 2:58 PM
To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DIS
Hi All,
Just wanted to update the list with my test results.
I modified my test to offload the blocking process to another server.
So the CPU stays low on my test machine (single processor machine).
When I do this, everything works well. So it looks like everyone was
right. When the CPU was kep
Of course nothing stops Mont from both encrypting and limiting access to
members of a group...
-Original Message-
From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frans Bouma
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 7:45 AM
To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
Subj
> >What about Thread.Interrupt? Isn't that for waking up a thread that's
> >currently sleeping?
>
> Thread.Interrupt is documented with "...If this thread is not currently
> blocked in a wait, sleep, or join state, it will be interrupted when it
> next begins to block.".
>
> You can use Thread.Inte
