I have a pretty strong feeling that you may need to implement SOAP extensions. Using SOAP extensions you can intercept the outgoing / incoming SOAP messages at different stages in the processing pipeline in order to perform additional functionality with them. Information can be found here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.services.protocols.soapextension.aspx\[^\]

The solution: 0) Determine the average number of votes each message received, and round that value down to the nearest whole number. 1) Adjust the vote count down so that all messages have an equal number of votes. Lowest rated votes are removed first. Any message that does not have at least the average number of votes is automatically eliminated from consideration. 2) Calculate the average score of the remaining messages. 3) Automatically add enough points to my message's score so that I win. "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997 ----- "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

Cursed with fat fingers and the lack of a typing wand :doh:

I like the cut of your jib, however.... When I find a hack frig solution this will be deployed out to over 10 thousand servers and unfortunately the current build of these does not have MSMQ installed. Installing this as part of the deployment process is not feasible.

After much hair pulling I have found a solution to this problem, I am not particularly happy with it but it is a solution none the less. After doing some further debugging it seems that when the A to B request is made the .NET Framework pushes this into the incorrect channel (i.e. the Client to A) as this channel has different sinks, when B receives the data it is unable to process it. Interestingly if I unregistered the Client to A channel the A to B call would work, obviously this isn't a solution as this then breaks all Client to A comms. At first it seemed that the solution was obvious, make sure that the correct channel is used. After much googling I have been unable to find a method of doing this. I did however find alot of people with the same problem ;) So the solution... The server B remoting framework has a client library which is installed on A. This library contains all the methods that B exposes across remoting. The solution was to create a wrapper around this client library, on instantiation the wrapper creates a new AppDomain and loads the client library into it. I then use a marhsalled transparent proxy object across to call the client library. Doing this means that the new AppDomain on has a single TcpChannel registered and therefore the selection issue doesn't exist. As always with these things there was a gotcha, which is if you leave the AppDomain unused for more than 5 minutes (default) the lease expires and the proxy fails. This can be fixed by, in the client library, overriding "InitializeLifetimeService" and returning null. So, wrapper code: public sealed class ClientLibraryWrapper { AppDomain clientDomain; ServerB.Client.EntryPoint client; public ClientLibraryWrapper { this.clientDomain = AppDomain.CreateDomain("ServerBClientDomain"); Assembly clientAssembly = Assembly.LoadFile(Environment.CurrentDirectory + @"\\ServerB.Client.dll"); this.clientDomain.Load(clientAssembly.FullName); Object obj = mhsClientDomain.CreateInstanceAndUnwrap(clientAssembly.FullName, "ServerB.Client.EntryPoint"); this.client = (ServerB.Client.EntryPoint)obj; } public int ServerBMethod() { this.client.ServerBMethod(); } } Client library code: public sealed class EntryPoint : MarshalByRefObject { public override object InitializeLifetimeService() { return null; } public int ServerBMethod() { return 1; } }

If you're using XML, use an XmlDocument. It sounds like your "XSD tool" is causing you more trouble than it's worth.

J4amieC wrote: An extra 2 milliseconds? Obviously you haven't read this[^] yet.

We are a much smaller shop, 5 developers, but we use SQL Compare from Red-Gate for deployment, Source safe for source control (this is very unsatisfactory). We expect to move to Team foundation server soon. SQL Compare is bloody marvelous. User signs off on UAT DB and it is deployed to production with no problems. Managing the development cycle is more challenging. When there are changes in UAT and the users want to start another round of changes cn be a nightmare! Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

Since posting the original solution I have found that you can also set these event directly on the XmlSerializer XmlSerializer xmlSerializer = new XmlSerializer(objectType); xmlSerializer.UnknownAttribute += new XmlAttributeEventHandler(xmlSerializer_UnknownAttribute); xmlSerializer.UnknownElement += new XmlElementEventHandler(xmlSerializer_UnknownElement); xmlSerializer.UnknownNode += new XmlNodeEventHandler(xmlSerializer_UnknownNode); xmlSerializer.UnreferencedObject += new UnreferencedObjectEventHandler(xmlSerializer_UnreferencedObject); From a functionality point of view I don't suppose it makes any difference at all, however IMHO this method is neater.

MrEyes wrote: P.S. For anybody who is interested the solution is So the solution wasn't casting the WebService object to the interface because of what I stated, right? MrEyes wrote: Bottom line, rant over MrEyes wrote: I absolutley don't care if its architecture doesnt meet the current flavour of the day. What did my post have to do with architecture?

Ack.. you may want to reconsider this approach. Did you know that you can use XPath queries in XML documents using the XmlDocument class in .NET? This might serve your purpose alot better than attempting to manually extract fields in this manner. The early bird who catches the worm works for someone who comes in late and owns the worm farm. -- Travis McGee

Well based on your comments and some research the general plan of action is something like the following: The "Proxy" service exposes a "CallWebService" method that takes an XML structure as one of the parameters. This structure will look something like the following: <CallData webserviceName="mywebservice"> <parameters> <parameter key="input1" value="input 1 data"/> <parameter key="input2" value="input 2 data"/> <parameter key="input3" value="input 3 data"/> </parameters> </CallData> When the "proxy" receives this request the following occurs: 1) Loads the relevant WSDL and associated config (i.e. endpoint, timeouts etc) from the "webservicename" attribute (probably from a DB). 2) From the WSDL data constructs an empty soap message to be posted, i.e. something like this POST /Service1.asmx HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8 Content-Length: length SOAPAction: "http://services.com/mywebservice" <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?$gt; <soap:Envelope xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"$gt; <soap:Body$gt; <mywebservice xmlns="http://messaging.external.e-mis.com/"$gt; <input1$gt;</input1$gt; <input2$gt;</input2$gt; <input3$gt;</input3$gt; </mywebservice$gt; </soap:Body$gt; </soap:Envelope$gt; From the submitted parameter data adds the relevant values to the relevant element in the soap message 4) Posts the full formed SOAP message to the configure endpoint 5) When the sync reply is received, it extracts the return data and puts this into a similar XML structure to the one that the client submitted, e.g. <ResultData> <results> <result key="input1" value="input 1 data"/> <result key="input2" value="input 2 data"/> </results> </CallData> And then returns this back to the client Point number 2 is where things get a little complicated. Having hunted around a little I have found a sample here on codeproject: http://www.codeproject.com/cs/webservices/wsdlparser.asp[^] I believe that this will do what I need, however it needs some hacking

You can find the different types of licenses here: http://themes.freshmeat.net/faq/view/48/[^] However your corporate lawyer is the best person of consultation before you bind a particular one to the product and ship it. Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage Tech Gossips

A trick I use is to change the file version not the assembly version. This will prevent older versions of my app from going down with a patch. Of course if you develop an entire new version of the CommonLibrary and your application it's best to update the assembly version as well. This will help with the problem of having an old assembly with the new application. WM. What about weapons of mass-construction? "What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson My blog

MrEyes wrote: The following code will retrieve a unique processor ID According to this web page[^] the processorID is not unique at all. You are confusing with the processor serial number which might be available through the UniqueID field of WMI, but this feature may be absent or disabled (in which case WMI returns a null value). The default state is: disabled. To access such features without WMI you need low-level code, say C + assembly, that executes the CPUID instruction and returns some register values; plus of course the necessary P/Invoke stuff to interface to the native code. For more info on CPUID, search for "Intel CPUID" and you will find utilities and documentation (Intel App Note 485). :) Luc Pattyn [My Articles] [Forum Guidelines]

yep. The maximum amount of moisture the air can hold drops rapidly as temperature decreases. You only really get heavy snow when it's slightly below freezing. By -15 or -20C the air can't hold enough to do anything more than drop a few flurries. -- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer

Well I have to admit I have been monitoring memory usage via task manager so I will have a look at perfmon. That being said, on large files (>200mb) the application eventually throws an out of memory exeception, which regardless of the monitoring mechanism is, how can a put it, catastrophic :omg:

check this article and try to use that http://www.codeproject.com/system/Task_Manager_Extension.asp[^] Regards R.Arockiapathinathan

You'll need to make the jobCount variable a member of the class instead of using a local variable as you did above. If you're using static methods, the variable will need to be a static variable. As far as a lock object, what I usually do is just create a variable of type object: private readonly object lockObject = new object(); It will need to be static if you're using it at the class level, i.e. in static methods. MrEyes wrote: An additional problem is that externally to this a user could click a Stop button, this should stop all threads and stop any further items being processed. Could I somehow use this Lock and Monitor functionality to do this? In my original code, I had a simple class var bool that would be checked at the top of the worker method. If the value was false then the worker method would immediately return This works. The structure of your thread method could be something like this: private void ThreadMethod(object data) { while(notStopped) { // Do stuff... } lock(lockObject) { jobCount--; Monitor.Pulse(lockObject); } } This way if the user clicks "Stop" and the notStopped variable is set to false, all of the threads break out of their loop, decrement the job counter, and signal that they're done. You may want to make the jobCount and notStopped variables volatile so that when one thread updates them, their values are immediately updated, i.e. the compiler won't try to do any optimization in delaying their update.