|
 |
iis_applications thread: Re: Serious/wierd IIS Problem - some expert advice needed
Message #1 by "Sandy Murdock" <sandy@m...> on Thu, 16 May 2002 04:43:56
|
|
Hi,
I have used com and com+ components. I would suggest the you don't use
Regsvr32, and only use com+. You will want to check the context you used
for the component in com+. (IE: the user account, if you use Interactive
it will try to use the IUSR_machine account unless you make the web-user
has logged in first - this usually fails).
I don't know for certain but I THINK that the com+ component is probably
running and your Regsvr32 has been removed.
You may be having a permissions problem with the component in com+. You
can (I don't recomment it) create an administrative account and use that
for your com+ authentication. If you do, run your asp. If it then works
you know the issue was the user account for the com+ context.
I hope that helps.
> Hello,
>
> Here the background.
>
> I have an IIS (ASP) application that calls a COM DLL which is registered
> on the same server to call database queries.
>
> I also have the same COM DLL registered on this server as a COM+
> application, and the proxy files as installed on a client to enable a VB
> client to access the same DLL functions.
>
> So the same DLL has been registered (regsvr32.dll) and also configured
as
> a COM+ application on the same machine.
>
> Problem:
> The VB application (configured to call COM+ DLL) is working fine but the
> web version (ASP pages) using IE fail to open. Restarting IIS will
restore
> the web version for about a few minutes and then the asp files again
stop
> working (and HTTP 500 error is reported).
>
> Please advise whether or not my first assumption of putting the same DLL
> in either forms is the cause of the problem.
>
> If yes then will changing merely the name of one of the DLL and then
> installing it, help. Or is it that registering the DLL as well as making
> it a COM+ application cause of the problem.
>
> In any case, please advise on how to remedy this situation.
>
> I appreciate any thought given towards this. Thank you very much.
>
> T.O.
|
|
 |