Search Results

Search found 1281 results on 52 pages for 'joes 2 pros'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 11/52 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • Video for an ads-driven web-site

    - by AntonAL
    I have a website, wich i will fill with a bunch of useful videos. I've implemented an ads rotation engine for articles and will do so for videos. The next milestone is to decide, how video will be integrated. They are two ways: To host videos myself. Pros: complete freedom. Cons: need tens of gigabytes of storage; support for multiple formats to be crossbrowser and crossdevice. Use Youtube. Pros: Very simple to use; nothing to do. What are pros and cons for each way ? Some questions for YouTube: Will i be able to control playback of YouTube-embedded video to make post-rolls ? What is ranking impact on my web-site, when most of pages will refer to YouTube ? Will, say, iPad play video, embedded via YouTube's iframe ? Does relying entirely on YouTube have a long-term perspective for a web-site, that should bring money ?

    Read the article

  • Threading models when talking to hardware devices

    - by Fuzz
    When writing an interface to hardware over a communication bus, communications timing can sometimes be critical to the operation of a device. As such, it is common for developers to spin up new threads to handle communications. It can also be a terrible idea to have a whole bunch of threads in your system, an in the case that you have multiple hardware devices you may have many many threads that are out of control of the main application. Certainly it can be common to have two threads per device, one for reading and one for writing. I am trying to determine the pros and cons of the two different models I can think of, and would love the help of the Programmers community. Each device instance gets handles it's own threads (or shares a thread for a communication device). A thread may exist for writing, and one for reading. Requested writes to a device from the API are buffered and worked on by the writer thread. The read thread exists in the case of blocking communications, and uses call backs to pass read data to the application. Timing of communications can be handled by the communications thread. Devices aren't given their own threads. Instead read and write requests are queued/buffered. The application then calls a "DoWork" function on the interface and allows all read and writes to take place and fire their callbacks. Timing is handled by the application, and the driver can request to be called at a given specific frequency. Pros for Item 1 include finer grain control of timing at the communication level at the expense of having control of whats going on at the higher level application level (which for a real time system, can be terrible). Pros for Item 2 include better control over the timing of the entire system for the application, at the expense of allowing each driver to handle it's own business. If anyone has experience with these scenarios, I'd love to hear some ideas on the approaches used.

    Read the article

  • NFS users getting a laggy GUI expierence

    - by elzilrac
    I am setting up a system (ubuntu 12.04) that uses ldap, pam, and autofs to load users and their home folders from a remote server. One of the options for login is sitting down at the machine and starting a GUI session. Programs such as chormium (browser) that preform many read/write operations in the ~/.cache and ~/.config files are slowing down the GUI experience as well as putting strain of the NFS server that is causing other users to have problems. Ubuntu had the handy-dandy XDG_CONFIG_HOME and XDG_CACHE_HOME variables that can be set to change the default location of .cache and .config from the home folder to somewhere else. There are several places to set them, but most of them are not optimal. /etc/environment pros: will work across all shells cons: cannot use variables like $USER so that you can't make users have different new locations for .cache and .config. Every users' new location would be the same directory. /etc/bash.bashrc pros: $USER works, so you can place them in different folders cons: only gets run for bash compatible shells ~/.pam_environment pros: works regardless of shell cons: cannot use system variables (like $USER), has it's own syntax, and has to be created for every user

    Read the article

  • Ask the Readers: Backing Your Files Up – Local Storage versus the Cloud

    - by Asian Angel
    Backing up important files is something that all of us should do on a regular basis, but may not have given as much thought to as we should. This week we would like to know if you use local storage, cloud storage, or a combination of both to back your files up. Photo by camknows. For some people local storage media may be the most convenient and/or affordable way to back up their files. Having those files stored on media under your control can also provide a sense of security and peace of mind. But storing your files locally may also have drawbacks if something happens to your storage media. So how do you know whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages or not? Here are some possible pros and cons that may affect your decision to use local storage to back up your files: Local Storage Pros You are in control of your data Your files are portable and can go with you when needed if using external or flash drives Files are accessible without an internet connection You can easily add more storage capacity as needed (additional drives, etc.) Cons You need to arrange room for your storage media (if you have multiple externals drives, etc.) Possible hardware failure No access to your files if you forget to bring your storage media with you or it is too bulky to bring along Theft and/or loss of home with all contents due to circumstances like fire If you are someone who is always on the go and needs to travel as lightly as possible, cloud storage may be the perfect way for you to back up and access your files. Perhaps your laptop has a hard-drive failure or gets stolen…unhappy events to be sure, but you will still have a copy of your files available. Perhaps a company wants to make sure their records, files, and other information are backed up off site in case of a major hardware or system failure…expensive and/or frustrating to fix if it happens, but once again there is a nice backup ready to go once things are fixed. As with local storage, here are some possible pros and cons that may influence your choice of cloud storage to back up your files: Cloud Storage Pros No need to carry around flash or bulky external drives All of your files are accessible wherever there is an internet connection No need to deal with local storage media (or its’ upkeep) Your files are still safe if your home is broken into or other unfortunate circumstances occur Cons Your files and data are not 100% under your control Possible hardware failure or loss of files on the part of your cloud storage provider (this could include a disgruntled employee wreaking havoc) No access to your files if you do not have an internet connection The cloud storage provider may eventually shutdown due to financial hardship or other unforeseen circumstances The possibility of your files and data being stolen by hackers due to a security breach on the part of your cloud storage provider You may also prefer to try and cover all of the possibilities by using both local and cloud storage to back up your files. If something happens to one, you always have the other to fall back on. Need access to those files at or away from home? As long as you have access to either your storage media or an internet connection, you are good to go. Maybe you are getting ready to choose a backup solution but are not sure which one would work better for you. Here is your chance to ask your fellow HTG readers which one they would recommend. Got a great backup solution already in place? Then be sure to share it with your fellow readers! How-To Geek Polls require Javascript. Please Click Here to View the Poll. Latest Features How-To Geek ETC The 20 Best How-To Geek Explainer Topics for 2010 How to Disable Caps Lock Key in Windows 7 or Vista How to Use the Avira Rescue CD to Clean Your Infected PC The Complete List of iPad Tips, Tricks, and Tutorials Is Your Desktop Printer More Expensive Than Printing Services? 20 OS X Keyboard Shortcuts You Might Not Know Winter Sunset by a Mountain Stream Wallpaper Add Sleek Style to Your Desktop with the Aston Martin Theme for Windows 7 Awesome WebGL Demo – Flight of the Navigator from Mozilla Sunrise on the Alien Desert Planet Wallpaper Add Falling Snow to Webpages with the Snowfall Extension for Opera [Browser Fun] Automatically Keep Up With the Latest Releases from Mozilla Labs in Firefox 4.0

    Read the article

  • Multitenancy in SQL Azure

    - by cibrax
    If you are building a SaaS application in Windows Azure that relies on SQL Azure, it’s probably that you will need to support multiple tenants at database level. This is short overview of the different approaches you can use for support that scenario, A different database per tenant A new database is created and assigned when a tenant is provisioned. Pros Complete isolation between tenants. All the data for a tenant lives in a database only he can access. Cons It’s not cost effective. SQL Azure databases are not cheap, and the minimum size for a database is 1GB.  You might be paying for storage that you don’t really use. A different connection pool is required per database. Updates must be replicated across all the databases You need multiple backup strategies across all the databases Multiple schemas in a database shared by all the tenants A single database is shared among all the tenants, but every tenant is assigned to a different schema and database user. Pros You only pay for a single database. Data is isolated at database level. If the credentials for one tenant is compromised, the rest of the data for the other tenants is not. Cons You need to replicate all the database objects in every schema, so the number of objects can increase indefinitely. Updates must be replicated across all the schemas. The connection pool for the database must maintain a different connection per tenant (or set of credentials) A different user is required per tenant, which is stored at server level. You have to backup that user independently. Centralizing the database access with store procedures in a database shared by all the tenants A single database is shared among all the tenants, but nobody can read the data directly from the tables. All the data operations are performed through store procedures that centralize the access to the tenant data. The store procedures contain some logic to map the database user to an specific tenant. Pros You only pay for a single database. You only have a set of objects to maintain and backup. Cons There is no real isolation. All the data for the different tenants is shared in the same tables. You can not use traditional ORM like EF code first for consuming the data. A different user is required per tenant, which is stored at server level. You have to backup that user independently. SQL Federations A single database is shared among all the tenants, but a different federation is used per tenant. A federation in few words, it’s a mechanism for horizontal scaling in SQL Azure, which basically uses the idea of logical partitions to distribute data based on certain criteria. Pros You only have a single database with multiple federations. You can use filtering in the connections to pick the right federation, so any ORM could be used to consume the data. Cons There is no real isolation at that database level. The isolation is enforced programmatically with federations.

    Read the article

  • What Apache/PHP configurations do you know and how good are they?

    - by FractalizeR
    Hello. I wanted to ask you about PHP/Apache configuration methods you know, their pros and cons. I will start myself: ---------------- PHP as Apache module---------------- Pros: good speed since you don't need to start exe every time especially in mpm-worker mode. You can also use various PHP accelerators in this mode like APC or eAccelerator. Cons: if you are running apache in mpm-worker mode, you may face stability issues because every glitch in any php script will lead to unstability to the whole thread pool of that apache process. Also in this mode all scripts are executed on behalf of apache user. This is bad for security. mpm-worker configuration requires PHP compiled in thread-safe mode. At least CentOS and RedHat default repositories doesn't have thread-safe PHP version so on these OSes you need to compile at least PHP yourself (there is a way to activate worker mpm on Apache). The use of thread-safe PHP binaries is considered experimental and unstable. Plus, many PHP extensions does not support thread-safe mode or were not well-tested in thread-safe mode. ---------------- PHP as CGI ---------------- This seems to be the slowest default configuration which seems to be a "con" itself ;) ---------------- PHP as CGI via mod_suphp ---------------- Pros: suphp allows you to execute php scipts on behalf of the script file owner. This way you can securely separate different sites on the same machine. Also, suphp allows to use different php.ini files per virtual host. Cons: PHP in CGI mode means less performance. In this mode you can't use php accelerators like APC because each time new process is spawned to handle script rendering the cache of previous process useless. BTW, do you know the way to apply some accelerator in this config? I heard something about using shm for php bytecode cache. Also, you cannot configure PHP via .htaccess files in this mode. You will need to install PECL htscanner for this if you need to set various per-script options via .htaccess (php_value / php_flag directives) ---------------- PHP as CGI via suexec ---------------- This configuration looks the same as with suphp, but I heard, that it's slower and less safe. Almost same pros and cons apply. ---------------- PHP as FastCGI ---------------- Pros: FastCGI standard allows single php process to handle several scripts before php process is killed. This way you gain performance since no need to spin up new php process for each script. You can also use PHP accelerators in this configuration (see cons section for comment). Also, FCGI almost like suphp also allows php processes to be executed on behalf of some user. mod_fcgid seems to have the most complete fcgi support and flexibility for apache. Cons: The use of php accelerator in fastcgi mode will lead to high memory consumption because each PHP process will have his own bytecode cache (unless there is some accelerator that can use shared memory for bytecode cache. Is there such?). FastCGI is also a little bit complex to configure. You need to create various configuration files and make some configuration modifications. It seems, that fastcgi is the most stable, secure, fast and flexible PHP configuration, however, a bit difficult to be configured. But, may be, I missed something? Comments are welcome!

    Read the article

  • SCOM 2007 versus Zenoss (or other open source)

    - by TheCleaner
    I've taken the liberty to test both SCOM 2007 and Zenoss and found the following: SCOM 2007 Pros: Great MS Windows server monitoring and reporting In-depth configuration and easily integrates into a "MS datacenter" Cons: limited network device monitoring support (without 3rd party plugins) expensive difficult learning curve Zenoss Pros: Open Source (free) decent server monitoring for Windows, great monitoring for Linux decent network device monitoring Cons: not as in-depth as SCOM (for Windows at least) So my question to you folks is this: Given the above, and given that I'm trying to monitor 55 Windows servers, 1 Linux server, 2 ESX servers, and Juniper equipment...which would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – Updates on Contests, Books and SQL Server

    - by pinaldave
    There are lots of things happening on this blog and I feel sometime it is difficult to keep up. One of the suggestion I keep on receiving if there is a single page where one can visit and know the updates. I did consider of the same at some point but in era of RSS Feed it is difficult to have proper audience to that page. Here are few updates on various contest and books give away in recent time. Combo set of 5 Joes 2 Pros Book – 1 for YOU and 1 for Friend – I have received so many entries for this contest. Many have sent me email asking if this contest can be extended by couple of days. For the same the deadline for this contest is now Nov 10th 7 AM. You can send your entries by that time. The prize is 2 combo set of Joes 2 Pros is of USD 444. If you have not take part in the contest please take part now. Guess What is in the box? – There were many entry for this contest. We played this contest on blog as well, facebook. The answer of this contest was announced in 2 days in blog post announcing my new book. The winner was Manas Dash from Bangalore. He answered “The box will contain SQL book authored by Vinod and Pinal”. This was the closest answer we received. Win 5 SQL Programming Book Contest will have winner announced by Nov 15th and winners will be sent email. Win 5 SQL Wait Stats Book Contest is closed and winners have been sent their award. My third book SQL Server Interview Questions and Answers have run out of stock in India in 36 hours of its launch. We are working very hard to make it available again. Thank you again for excellent support! Without your participation all the give away have no significance. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: About Me, Pinal Dave, PostADay, Readers Contribution, Readers Question, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Puzzle, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • JavaFX Dialogs, Anyone?

    - by HecklerMark
    A common question about JavaFX, especially for those coming from a Swing background, is "How do I do Dialogs?" The reason this is a question at all is that, currently, there is no baked-in capability to do dialog boxes within a pure JavaFX 2.x application. But come on...you wouldn't be reading about this at all if you weren't a resourceful programmer. You have ways of making things happen.  :-) I ran across a decent patch of code recently that handles many of the dialog chores for you. Pros and cons follow, but pointing your browser to this link on Github (appropriately named JavaFXDialog) will get you off to a good start. Here are some screen shots the original code author, Anton Smirnov, provided: Nothing fancy, just clean and functional. Now, about those pros and cons. From my perspective, here's the bottom line: Pros Already developed. Time required to implement is limited to downloading and decompressing the file, doing a bit of reading, and writing a few lines of code to try things out. Easy. Most of the work is done, and the interface is pretty simple. Open source. If you want to make changes - and I'm already thinking along those lines, so you may as well admit you will, too - you can do it. Cons Documentation. What you see on the Wiki page is the extent of it. Lack of activity. As of the date this article was published, the code hasn't been updated in several months...so the project is a bit stale. To be fair, the cons listed above won't cause anyone to lose sleep. After all, you don't expect constant revisions against something that works well enough for most purposes, and if your needs exceed what is there, it's easy to mod the code yourself or "roll your own" if you prefer. The lack of documentation isn't a show-stopper either due to the limited functionality and complexity of the code. Wrapping It Up If you need a quick, drop-in dialog capability for your JavaFX 2.x app, give it a try and see what you think. And if you're already using something you like, please share it as well! I'd love to hear from you, take a look at what you pass along, and maybe do a "dialog shoot-out" article in the future. So..what works for you?  :-) All the best, Mark

    Read the article

  • Should I choose Doctrine 2 or Propel 1.5/1.6, and why?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'd like to hear from those who have used Doctrine 2 (or later) and Propel 1.5 (or later). Most comparisons between these two object relational mappers are based on old versions -- Doctrine 1 versus Propel 1.3/1.4, and both ORMs went through significant redesigns in their recent revisions. For example, most of the criticism of Propel seems to center around the "ModelName Peer" classes, which are deprecated in 1.5 in any case. Here's what I've accumulated so far (And I've tried to make this list as balanced as possible...): Propel Pros Extremely IDE friendly, because actual code is generated, instead of relying on PHP magic methods. This means IDE features like code completion are actually helpful. Fast (In terms of database usage -- no runtime introspection is done on the database) Clean migration between schema versions (at least in the 1.6 beta) Can generate PHP 5.3 models (i.e. namespaces) Easy to chain a lot of things into a single database query with things like useXxx methods. (See the "code completion" video above) Cons Requires an extra build step, namely building the model classes. Generated code needs rebuilt whenever Propel version is changed, a setting is changed, or the schema changes. This might be unintuitive to some and custom methods applied to the model are lost. (I think?) Some useful features (i.e. version behavior, schema migrations) are in beta status. Doctrine Pros More popular Doctrine Query Language can express potentially more complicated relationships between data than easily possible with Propel's ActiveRecord strategy. Easier to add reusable behaviors when compared with Propel. DocBlock based commenting for building the schema is embedded in the actual PHP instead of a separate XML file. Uses PHP 5.3 Namespaces everywhere Cons Requires learning an entirely new programming language (Doctrine Query Language) Implemented in terms of "magic methods" in several places, making IDE autocomplete worthless. Requires database introspection and thus is slightly slower than Propel by default; caching can remove this but the caching adds considerable complexity. Fewer behaviors are included in the core codebase. Several features Propel provides out of the box (such as Nested Set) are available only through extensions. Freakin' HUGE :) This I have gleaned though only through reading the documentation available for both tools -- I've not actually built anything yet. I'd like to hear from those who have used both tools though, to share their experience on pros/cons of each library, and what their recommendation is at this point :)

    Read the article

  • Single python file distribution: module or package?

    - by DanielSank
    Suppose I have a useful python function or class (or whatever) called useful_thing which exists in a single file. There are essentialy two ways to organize the source tree. The first way uses a single module: - setup.py - README.rst - ...etc... - foo.py where useful_thing is defined in foo.py. The second strategy is to make a package: - setup.py - README.rst - ...etc... - foo |-module.py |-__init__.py where useful_thing is defined in module.py. In the package case __init__.py would look like this from foo.module import useful_thing so that in both cases you can do from foo import useful_thing. Question: Which way is preferred, and why? EDIT: Since user gnat says this question is poorly formed, I'll add that the official python packaging tutorial does not seem to comment on which of the methods described above is the preferred one. I am explicitly not giving my personal list of pros and cons because I'm interested in whether there is a community preferred method, not generating a discussion of pros/cons :)

    Read the article

  • Starting a career in mobile development in next 5 months?

    - by Jungle Hunter
    I will be starting my career shortly and have the opportunity to being my career in mobility. I have an option to be in more traditional fields (the ones that have been around for quite some time now like web development and Java apps development). What are the pros and cons of both? Also, if I do choose mobility, then I might be presented with the option of iOS or Android. Pros and cons of choosing each? Period: Joining in next 5 months. Mobility company profile: Major consulting company.

    Read the article

  • Is ORM an Anti-Pattern?

    - by derphil
    I had a very stimulating and interessting discussion with a colleague about ORM and it's Pros and Cons. In my opinion, an ORM is useful only in the rarest cases. At least in my experience. But I don't want to list my own arguments at this time. So I ask you, what do you think about ORM? What are the Pros and the Cons? P.S. I've posted this "question" yesterday on Stackoverflow, but some of the user think, that this should better posted here.

    Read the article

  • Can mass different log-in pages result in SEO duplicate and/or low quality punishments?

    - by Noam
    I have internal pages that rely on an external API which I would like to build upon user request. Two options I thought about: Make lots of 'thin' pages that specifies that if you want content about X, you need to log-in, and then the page will be built. Pros: user understands what he'll get when logging in. Cons: SEO implications of such a solution due to the mass 'low quality' and 'cross-sites duplicate content' Make them all redirect to ONE same generic log-in page. Pros: No duplicate low quality content. Cons: Lots of internal links to the same log-in page. Which would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • when should be choose simple php mail and when smpt with loggin+password?

    - by user43353
    Hi, My Case: web application that need to send 1,000 messages per day to main gmail account. (Only need to send email, not need receive emails - email client) 1. option - use php mail function + sendmail + config php.ini php example: <?php $to = '[email protected]'; $subject = 'the subject'; $message = 'hello'; $headers = 'From: [email protected]' . "\r\n" . 'Reply-To: [email protected]' . "\r\n" . 'X-Mailer: PHP/' . phpversion(); mail($to, $subject, $message, $headers); ?> php.ini config (ubuntu): sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail -t -i pros:don't need email account, easy to setup cons:? 2. option - use Zend_Mail + transport on smpt+ password auto php example(need include Zend_Mail classes): $config = array('auth' => 'login', 'username' => 'myusername', 'password' => 'password'); $transport = new Zend_Mail_Transport_Smtp('mail.server.com', $config); $mail = new Zend_Mail(); $mail->setBodyText('This is the text of the mail.'); $mail->setFrom('[email protected]', 'Some Sender'); $mail->addTo('[email protected]', 'Some Recipient'); $mail->setSubject('TestSubject'); $mail->send($transport); pros:? cons:? Questions: Can 1 option be filtered by gmail email server as spam? please can you add pros + cons to options above Thanks

    Read the article

  • LYNC 2010 Dial-In in Meeting DTMF issue

    - by user140116
    We are facing an issue in the LYNC2010 dial-in to a meeting. We redirect an Asterisk number to LYNC, whitch connects successfully in the dial-in plan of LYNC. After calling from external network to the given number, we hear LYNC aswering and prompting us to enter the PIN and afterwards the hash key. I should mention that all other dials to LYNC from Asterisk and vise versa are routed successfully. Also all DTMF we send to Asterisk from the phone (IVR, Extension, PIN etc) are routed also fine Afterwards we press the appropriate pin folowed by the hash keyand we get 'Sorry I can't find meeting with that number' Some pros mentioned that it might be dtmfmode=RFC2833 or dtmfmode=auto in Asterisk (All checked and tried). Some pros mentioned, that there is a problem in geeral in LYNC and DTMF (even with Cisco Call Manager). Some other pros mentioned that chack box 'Enable refer support' in Voice Routinh\Trunk Configuration' in LYNC has to be unchecked (Also tested). The problem stil remains and there is no way to enter a meeting room by dial-in. ANY idea would be appreciated!!!!!!!!

    Read the article

  • When should I use MySQL compressed protocol?

    - by ento
    I've learned that MySQL can compress communication between servers and clients. Compression is used if both client and server support zlib compression, and the client requests compression. (from MySQL Forge Wiki) The most obvious pros and cons are pros: Reduced payload size cons: Increased computation time So, is compressed protocol something I should enable whenever I can afford servers with adequate specs? Are there other factors I should consider?

    Read the article

  • dirname(__FILE__) VS setting global variable to directories

    - by SAFAD
    what are the pros and cons of using this : $globals['server_url'] = dirname(__FILE__); $globals['mainfiles'] = dirname(__FILE__).'/main'; and the pros and cons of using this : $globals['server_url'] = '/srv/www/htdocs/somwhere/'; $globals['mainfiles'] = '/srv/www/htdocs/somwhere/main'; And what do you suggest. by the way: these are set in config.php file which is called by other files as well, to stop directory conflicts when including files we use it like this : require_once($globals['server_url'].'/test.php');

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >