Thanks for the reply, Shahriar. But I was referring more to what happens to any active Web Service calls being made. Let me try to explain it a different way. Let's say the payment process takes 30 seconds to return from a 3rd party vendor (they own the Web Service, we're just calling in to it). 10 seconds in to a call, we drop in App_Offline.htm, and shut the site down. Does the payment process Web Service call to our 3rd party vendor complete? Or is it aborted by the shutdown of our application. Either way, I know that the user is still going to see a "Site Offline" message. Thanks again!

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

I understand how to use App_Offline.htm, and most of its caveats, but what I can't seem to find information on is how it deals with executing threads. What I'm concerned about specifically is this. Our company website allows our users to post online payments for their bill with us. Lets say we go to do production maintenance at night, and drop in App_Offline.htm. But we have 3 users submitting payments at that exact moment. I know that App_Offline.htm will block any further responses from coming from ASP.NET, but does it abort the web services calls, or does it allow them to finish, and only then tear down the sessions? Thanks in advance.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

I use FoxIt, and have never had a problem with it. Works great!

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

I myself tend to be independent, but there are some things that I agree with Obama on. And some things I don't. As far as I'm concerned, as long as it's civil, you can agree or disagree with me all you want. :) Life would be pretty friggen boring if we all agreed, and who's to say it'd run any smoother?

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

I had one when I was a kid. It didn't work very well... Geez, I miss that cartoon! Fortunately, I got the collected works 2 Christmas' ago; one of my most prized possessions.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Thanks for the input from both you and Mark. I'll take both of your advise to heart, and go from there. I agree that just because you can doesn't imply that you should. That's one of the interesting things we need to deal with daily as developers, though; when is it to much reducing. I happen to love the ternary operator (int x = user.Name == "Bob" ? 1 : 0), but I've seen people that really hate it, and insist that only if/else blocks should be use. I guess it falls down to a matter of personal style. I personally like to shrink my code down as much as possible, but not so far that I can't read it 2 months for now. Again, thanks for both of your input! Very much appreciated. :)

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

You're out of your mind, dude. No one, but another spammer, is going to help you write a spam program. Hacking a website like you're suggesting is not only highly unethical, but also illegal, and if you try, I hope eBay hits you hard for it.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Hey Mark, thanks for that. I think I should've been more specific. I was wondering if there was a way to do it in Linq syntax. Regardless, I ultimately went with something very similar to what you provided. Thanks again for the reply.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

My apologies if something like this has already been asked and answered; I did some Google searching, as well searching on this site, and didn't find it, so here goes. I'm new to the world of .NET 3.5 and Linq. What I have are 1 + n xml files. The first Xml file looks sort of like this:

<files>
<file id="1" name="(some guid)"/>
<file id="2" name="(some guid)"/>
</files>

There are then files in the same directory, whose name matches the guid plus .xml, like so:

<file id="1">
<prop1>Value 1</prop1>
<prop1>Value 1</prop1>
<prop1>Value 1</prop1>
</file>

What I'd like to be able to do is this: for each file listed in the first xml blob, I want to create an object based on the values in each of the other xml files that look like the 2nd blob, and return that as an IEnumerable<Thing>. Does anybody know where I can find an example of how to do this? Thanks in advance.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

My apologies if something like this has already been asked and answered; I did some Google searching, as well searching on this site, and didn't find it, so here goes. I'm new to the world of .NET 3.5 and Linq. What I have are 1 + n xml files. The first Xml file looks sort of like this:

<files>
<file id="1" name="(some guid)"/>
<file id="2" name="(some guid)"/>
</files>

There are then files in the same directory, whose name matches the guid plus .xml, like so:

<file id="1">
<prop1>Value 1</prop1>
<prop1>Value 1</prop1>
<prop1>Value 1</prop1>
</file>

What I'd like to be able to do is this: for each file listed in the first xml blob, I want to create an object based on the values in each of the other xml files that look like the 2nd blob, and return that as an IEnumerable<Thing>. Does anybody know where I can find an example of how to do this? Thanks in advance.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

If you're a good programmer, it happens far too often. ;) It means that you're learning and growing as a developer.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Touche! :) Valid point. Firefox and Chrome both run on Windows and Linux, so I suppose you could say that they're free. But you still have to pay money for the hardware to run Linux on... so maybe they aren't free at all after all. :laugh: OK, if you've already got a computer, and paid for the license to run Windows, or installed Linux, then they're free... or something.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Yahoo! Mail, Live Mail, GMail, Hotmail, etc, etc, etc. Yes, you can install and use a POP3 client, but their primary UI is a website, and the aforementioned people will use them, not knowing that they can download a program, much less how to attach one to the POP3 and SMTP points of the site. So yup, the browser can be, and usually is, an email client. Heck, I'm an IT professional, and I use the web front end for my email.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

OK, whatever helps you sleep at night. It is my honest and professional opinion that the EU wasted everyone's time with this. Nothing stops you from downloading another browser. Nothing. If you're ignorant of how a computer works, and of your choices, then you most likely don't give a damn what browser you're using anyway, as long as it'll let you check your email.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Um, browsers are free. They make their money from ad revenue, not from selling licenses. And thus, I say again, nothing, NOTHING, stops you from downloading, installing, and using another browser. If Microsoft went out of their way to prevent you from downloading other browsers, or made it an inconceivable nightmare to install one, THEN you'd have a point. But since they don't, I'm sorry, but I don't really see yours.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

And that's Microsoft's fault how? The other browser vendors CAN advertise. I'm sure Apple makes enough money at least to advertise the Opera browser for Windows. But they don't. Microsoft's fault? No. Google? You think Google can't afford advertising? Really? Again, Microsoft's fault? No. Hell, I don't know the numbers, but I'd imagine even Mozilla foundation, despite being open source, could throw some money at some billboards. Ford Motor company is not forced to advertise for Alpine or Kenwood as replacements for their stock stereos. Why should Microsoft? They've never stopped you from downloading alternatives (I'm writing this from Chrome). I say again, if they're going to force Microsoft to give you a choice of browsers, why not go all the way, and force them to make the user choose ALL options? Then they truly get choice. Of course, installing Windows will become a 10 hour job, but hey, the EU will be happy.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Easy my friend. Just use this site: http://www.lmgtfy.com/[^]

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

Is anybody else getting sick and tired of this garbage? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091216/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_eu_microsoft;_ylt=Ah_C4OTFI2P5PnUCi_QYrJt0fNdF[^] What will they force Microsoft to do next? Offer us a choice of media players? Or calculators? Or notepads? Or spyware tools? If the EU had their way, a Windows installation would take 8 hours; not because of the amount of data being copied in, but because of the time it takes to get past the damn install wizard. This has gotten out of hand. Just about everyone today knows that IE is not the only player. The only ones who don't for the most part are grandparent who might be using their first computer, or someone in a 3rd world country that only has access to a open source computer anyway. I'm glad that the EU can't reach out of Europe. Trust me, I'm not saying Europeans are stupid. They're not. But the EU must think they are.

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

he Probably won't be as funny as Charlie Sheen with his head in the light socket in Hot Shots, but it'd still be funny!

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com

:laugh: You know, anytime people like this want to remove themselves from the gene pool, it's fine by me. I just hope they use this guy as an example in the local schools to let the kids know that there's a good reason that certain things are not allowed...

Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://www.feralcodemonkies.com