在 Web 主机上安装和运行 .NET Windows 服务
我已经在 JOS-.NET 板上问过这个问题，但 Joel 正在关闭该板，所以这里又来了：
Web 托管提供商是否允许您安装 Windows 服务？ 我想尝试一些自动化的东西，目前我可以在自己的开发电脑上做得很好，但我想开始向公众开放这些东西。 但是，网络主机是否允许您运行 installutil.exe？
如果有人有这方面的经验，请告诉我。 谢谢。
I already asked this question at the JOS-.NET board but Joel is closing that board down so here it is again:
Do web hosting providers allow you to install Windows Services? I want to play around with some automation stuff, which I can currently do fine from my own dev pc, but I would like to start opening this stuff up to the public. However, do web hosts allow you to run installutil.exe?
If anyone has experience with this please let me know. Thanks.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
不，99% 的托管提供商（至少对于共享托管环境）不允许您安装 Windows 服务来增强站点功能。
如果您使用 VPS 或专用设置，并且可以访问计算机的远程桌面，那么是的，您可以。
No, 99% of the hosting providers, at least for shared hosting environments do NOT let you install windows services to augment your site functionality.
If you are on a VPS or dedicated setup, and have access to remote desktop into the machine then yes, you can.
您在 ASP.NET 中寻找的是后台进程。 这是一个作为单独线程实现的进程，您将存储在 Application 对象中。
一般来说，不建议这样做，因为它不能很好地扩展。 它将与 IIS/ASP.NET 进程竞争资源。
谷歌搜索更多信息 --> 谷歌搜索。
编辑：正如其他人所说。 通常 ISP 不会让您安装服务应用程序。 使用后台进程是这些情况的解决方案。
What you are looking for in ASP.NET is a background process. This is a process implemented as a separate thread that you will store at the Application object.
In general it is not advisable to do something like this because it does not scale well. It will compete for resources with IIS/ASP.NET proccess.
Google it for more information --> google search.
EDIT: As other's have said. Usually ISPs will not let you install service apps. Using a background process is the solution on those cases.
谢谢米切尔和维马尔克斯。
我发现这一轮关于实现服务的方式，但实际上不必安装服务。
然而，它在实现上有点不靠谱，所以我可能会去尝试 VPS/专用路线。
Thanks Mitchel and vmarquez.
I found this round about way of implementing a service but without having to actually install a service.
However, it is a bit hokie in implementation, so I might just go and try the VPS/dedicated route.