C
Chris Murphy
I am attempting to monitor a very large filesystem setup
as a set of window's shares. Basically, the remote
machine has a set of drives (three in fact) that each
contain folders labeled A, B, C, D .. Z split across the
drives. There is, for instance, D:\A, E:\M, and F:\Z.
These are all being shared as 'A', 'B', 'C', etc.
I am trying to monitor these for changes. I am creating
26 FileSystemWatchers and pushing them all onto a stack
(as a convenient place to keep them). What happens is
that they all work at some point or another, but sometime
after the final FileSystemWatcher (Z) is created, some of
the other watchers seem to disappear. In the currently
running instance, the C and S watchers seem to stop
sending events. When run on another computer, the R
watcher stops. It is not buffer overflows, I am catching
those and have at times seen them get thrown. This seems
to be a seperate problem. I am wondering whether I
cannot have 26 seperate watchers open due to limitations
in SMB or something, or whether there is something else
going on internally that I am missing?
Any help is appreciated...
as a set of window's shares. Basically, the remote
machine has a set of drives (three in fact) that each
contain folders labeled A, B, C, D .. Z split across the
drives. There is, for instance, D:\A, E:\M, and F:\Z.
These are all being shared as 'A', 'B', 'C', etc.
I am trying to monitor these for changes. I am creating
26 FileSystemWatchers and pushing them all onto a stack
(as a convenient place to keep them). What happens is
that they all work at some point or another, but sometime
after the final FileSystemWatcher (Z) is created, some of
the other watchers seem to disappear. In the currently
running instance, the C and S watchers seem to stop
sending events. When run on another computer, the R
watcher stops. It is not buffer overflows, I am catching
those and have at times seen them get thrown. This seems
to be a seperate problem. I am wondering whether I
cannot have 26 seperate watchers open due to limitations
in SMB or something, or whether there is something else
going on internally that I am missing?
Any help is appreciated...