Search Results

Search found 6716 results on 269 pages for 'distributed algorithm'.

Page 119/269 | < Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >

  • In the Cloud, Everything Costs Money

    - by BuckWoody
    I’ve been teaching my daughter about budgeting. I’ve explained that most of the time the money coming in is from only one or two sources – and you can only change that from time to time. The money going out, however, is to many locations, and it changes all the time. She’s made a simple debits and credits spreadsheet, and I’m having her research each part of the budget. Her eyes grow wide when she finds out everything has a cost – the house, gas for the lawnmower, dishes, water for showers, food, electricity to run the fridge, a new fridge when that one breaks, everything has a cost. She asked me “how do you pay for all this?” It’s a sentiment many adults have looking at their own budgets – and one reason that some folks don’t even make a budget. It’s hard to face up to the realities of how much it costs to do what we want to do. When we design a computing solution, it’s interesting to set up a similar budget, because we don’t always consider all of the costs associated with it. I’ve seen design sessions where the new software or servers are considered, but the “sunk” costs of personnel, networking, maintenance, increased storage, new sizes for backups and offsite storage and so on are not added in. They are already on premises, so they are assumed to be paid for already. When you move to a distributed architecture, you'll see more costs directly reflected. Store something, pay for that storage. If the system is deployed and no one is using it, you’re still paying for it. As you watch those costs rise, you might be tempted to think that a distributed architecture costs more than an on-premises one. And you might be right – for some solutions. I’ve worked with a few clients where moving to a distributed architecture doesn’t make financial sense – so we didn’t implement it. I still designed the system in a distributed fashion, however, so that when it does make sense there isn’t much re-architecting to do. In other cases, however, if you consider all of the on-premises costs and compare those accurately to operating a system in the cloud, the distributed system is much cheaper. Again, I never recommend that you take a “here-or-there-only” mentality – I think a hybrid distributed system is usually best – but each solution is different. There simply is no “one size fits all” to architecting a solution. As you design your solution, cost out each element. You might find that using a hybrid approach saves you money in one design and not in another. It’s a brave new world indeed. So yes, in the cloud, everything costs money. But an on-premises solution also costs money – it’s just that “dad” (the company) is paying for it and we don’t always see it. When we go out on our own in the cloud, we need to ensure that we consider all of the costs.

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2003 and Outlook rule: Send auto reply message not working

    - by Mestika
    Hi, I have created a distributed group which have to send a auto reply when receiving a mail. I know that it is impossible to send a auto reply within a distributed group, but following a guide I have created a mail account called “noreply”. In outlook I have created a rule in the “noreply” account where I chose following conditions: Send to a person or distributed list (where I selected my distributed group) Then to specify what to do with that message I selected Have server reply using a specific message I’ve created my message and saved it. But when I try to write an e-mail to the distributed group it doesn’t send back the reply message. Does anyone knows what I’m doing wrong? Sincerely Mestika

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2003 and Outlook rule: Send auto reply message not working

    - by Mestika
    I have created a distributed group which have to send a auto reply when receiving a mail. I know that it is impossible to send a auto reply within a distributed group, but following a guide I have created a mail account called “noreply”. In outlook I have created a rule in the “noreply” account where I chose following conditions: Send to a person or distributed list (where I selected my distributed group) Then to specify what to do with that message I selected Have server reply using a specific message I’ve created my message and saved it. But when I try to write an e-mail to the distributed group it doesn’t send back the reply message. Does anyone knows what I’m doing wrong? Sincerely Mestika

    Read the article

  • How does the rsync algorithm correctly identify repeating blocks?

    - by Kai
    I'm on a personal quest to learn how the rsync algorithm works. After some reading and thinking, I've come up with a situation where I think the algorithm fails. I'm trying to figure out how this is resolved in an actual implementation. Consider this example, where A is the receiver and B is the sender. A = abcde1234512345fghij B = abcde12345fghij As you can see, the only change is that 12345 has been removed. Now, to make this example interesting, let's choose a block size of 5 bytes (chars). Hashing the values on the sender's side using the weak checksum gives the following values list. abcde|12345|fghij abcde -> 495 12345 -> 255 fghij -> 520 values = [495, 255, 520] Next we check to see if any hash values differ in A. If there's a matching block we can skip to the end of that block for the next check. If there's a non-matching block then we've found a difference. I'll step through this process. Hash the first block. Does this hash exist in the values list? abcde -> 495 (yes, so skip) Hash the second block. Does this hash exist in the values list? 12345 -> 255 (yes, so skip) Hash the third block. Does this hash exist in the values list? 12345 -> 255 (yes, so skip) Hash the fourth block. Does this hash exist in the values list? fghij -> 520 (yes, so skip) No more data, we're done. Since every hash was found in the values list, we conclude that A and B are the same. Which, in my humble opinion, isn't true. It seems to me this will happen whenever there is more than one block that share the same hash. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • What algorithm should I use for encrypting and embedding a password for an application?

    - by vfclists
    What algorithm should I use for encrypting and embedding a password for an application? It obviously is not bullet proof, but it should be good enough to thwart someone scanning the database with a hex editor, or make it hard for someone who has the skills to use a debugger to trace the code to work out, either by scanning for the encrypted password, or using a debugger to run through the decryption code. Object Pascal would be nice. /vfclists

    Read the article

  • QuickGraph - is there algorithm for find all parents (up to root vertex's) of a set of vertex's

    - by Greg
    Hi, In QuickGraph - is there algorithm for find all parents (up to root vertex's) of a set of vertex's. In other words all vertex's which have somewhere under them (on the way to the leaf nodes) one or more of the vertexs input. So if the vertexs were Nodes, and the edges were a depends on relationship, find all nodes that would be impacted by a given set of nodes. If not how hard is it to write one's own algorithms?

    Read the article

  • User-Defined Customer Events & their impact (FA Type Profile)

    - by Rajesh Sharma
    CC&B automatically creates field activities when a specific Customer Event takes place. This depends on the way you have setup your Field Activity Type Profiles, the templates within, and associated SP Condition(s) on the template. CC&B uses the service point type, its state and referenced customer event to determine which field activity type to generate.   Customer events available in the base product include: Cut for Non-payment (CNP) Disconnect Warning (DIWA) Reconnect for Payment (REPY) Reread (RERD) Stop Service (STOP) Start Service (STRT) Start/Stop (STSP)   Note the Field values/codes defined for each event.   CC&B comes with a flexibility to define new set of customer events. These can be defined in the Look Up - CUST_EVT_FLG. Values from the Look Up are used on the Field Activity Type Profile Template page.     So what's the use of having user-defined Customer Events? And how will the system detect such events in order to create field activity(s)?   Well, system can only detect such events when you reference a user-defined customer event on a Severance Event Type for an event type Create Field Activities.     This way you can create additional field activities of a specific field activity type for user-defined customer events.   One of our customers adopted this feature and created a user-defined customer event CNPW - Cut for Non-payment for Water Services. This event was then linked on a Field Activity Type Profile and referenced on a Severance Event - CUT FOR NON PAY-W. The associated Severance Process was configured to trigger a reconnection process if it was cancelled (done by defining a Post Cancel Algorithm). Whenever this Severance Event was executed, a specific type of Field Activity was generated for disconnection purposes. The Field Activity type was determined by the system from the Field Activity Type Profile referenced for the SP Type, SP's state and the referenced user-defined customer event. All was working well until the time when they realized that in spite of the Severance Process getting cancelled (when a payment was made); the Post Cancel Algorithm was not executed to start a Reconnection Severance Process for the purpose of generating a reconnection field activity and reconnecting the service.   Basically, the Post Cancel algorithm (if specified on a Severance Process Template) is triggered when a Severance Process gets cancelled because a credit transaction has affected/relieved a Service Agreement's debt.   So what exactly was happening? Now we come to actual question as to what is the impact in having a user-defined customer event.   System defined/base customer events are hard-coded across the entire system. There is an impact even if you remove any customer event entry from the Look Up. User-defined customer events are not recognized by the system anywhere else except in the severance process, as described above.   There are few programs which have routines to first validate the completion of disconnection field activities, which were raised as a result of customer event CNP - Cut for Non-payment in order to perform other associated actions. One such program is the Post Cancel Algorithm, referenced on a Severance Process Template, generally used to reconnect services which were disconnected from other Severance Event, specifically CNP - Cut for Non-Payment. Post cancel algorithm provided by the product - SEV POST CAN does the following (below is the algorithm's description):   This algorithm is called after a severance process has been cancelled (typically because the debt was paid and the SA is no longer eligible to be on the severance process). It checks to see if the process has a completed 'disconnect' event and, if so, starts a reconnect process using the Reconnect Severance Process Template defined in the parameter.    Notice the underlined text. This algorithm implicitly checks for Field Activities having completed status, which were generated from Severance Events as a result of CNP - Cut for Non-payment customer event.   Now if we look back to the customer's issue, we can relate that the Post Cancel algorithm was triggered, but was not able to find any 'Completed' CNP - Cut for Non-payment related field activity. And hence was not able to start a reconnection severance process. This was because a field activity was generated and completed for a customer event CNPW - Cut for Non-payment of Water Services instead.   To conclude, if you introduce new customer events that extend or simulate base customer events, the ones that are included in the base product, ensure that there is no other impact either direct or indirect to other business functions that the application has to offer.  

    Read the article

  • Limitations of User-Defined Customer Events (FA Type Profile)

    - by Rajesh Sharma
    CC&B automatically creates field activities when a specific Customer Event takes place. This depends on the way you have setup your Field Activity Type Profiles, the templates within, and associated SP Condition(s) on the template. CC&B uses the service point type, its state and referenced customer event to determine which field activity type to generate.   Customer events available in the base product include: Cut for Non-payment (CNP) Disconnect Warning (DIWA) Reconnect for Payment (REPY) Reread (RERD) Stop Service (STOP) Start Service (STRT) Start/Stop (STSP)   Note the Field values/codes defined for each event.   CC&B comes with a flexibility to define new set of customer events. These can be defined in the Look Up - CUST_EVT_FLG. Values from the Look Up are used on the Field Activity Type Profile Template page.     So what's the use of having user-defined Customer Events? And how will the system detect such events in order to create field activity(s)?   Well, system can only detect such events when you reference a user-defined customer event on a Severance Event Type for an event type Create Field Activities.     This way you can create additional field activities of a specific field activity type for user-defined customer events.   One of our customers adopted this feature and created a user-defined customer event CNPW - Cut for Non-payment for Water Services. This event was then linked on a Field Activity Type Profile and referenced on a Severance Event - CUT FOR NON PAY-W. The associated Severance Process was configured to trigger a reconnection process if it was cancelled (done by defining a Post Cancel Algorithm). Whenever this Severance Event was executed, a specific type of Field Activity was generated for disconnection purposes. The Field Activity type was determined by the system from the Field Activity Type Profile referenced for the SP Type, SP's state and the referenced user-defined customer event. All was working well until the time when they realized that in spite of the Severance Process getting cancelled (when a payment was made); the Post Cancel Algorithm was not executed to start a Reconnection Severance Process for the purpose of generating a reconnection field activity and reconnecting the service.   Basically, the Post Cancel algorithm (if specified on a Severance Process Template) is triggered when a Severance Process gets cancelled because a credit transaction has affected/relieved a Service Agreement's debt.   So what exactly was happening? Now we come to actual question as to what are limitations in having user-defined customer event.   System defined/base customer events are hard-coded across the entire system. There is an impact even if you remove any customer event entry from the Look Up. User-defined customer events are not recognized by the system anywhere else except in the severance process, as described above.   There are few programs which have routines to first validate the completion of disconnection field activities, which were raised as a result of customer event CNP - Cut for Non-payment in order to perform other associated actions. One such program is the Post Cancel Algorithm, referenced on a Severance Process Template, generally used to reconnect services which were disconnected from other Severance Event, specifically CNP - Cut for Non-Payment. Post cancel algorithm provided by the product - SEV POST CAN does the following (below is the algorithm's description):   This algorithm is called after a severance process has been cancelled (typically because the debt was paid and the SA is no longer eligible to be on the severance process). It checks to see if the process has a completed 'disconnect' event and, if so, starts a reconnect process using the Reconnect Severance Process Template defined in the parameter.    Notice the underlined text. This algorithm implicitly checks for Field Activities having completed status, which were generated from Severance Events as a result of CNP - Cut for Non-payment customer event.   Now if we look back to the customer's issue, we can relate that the Post Cancel algorithm was triggered, but was not able to find any 'Completed' CNP - Cut for Non-payment related field activity. And hence was not able to start a reconnection severance process. This was because a field activity was generated and completed for a customer event CNPW - Cut for Non-payment of Water Services instead.   To conclude, if you introduce new customer events, you should be aware that you don't extend or simulate base customer events, the ones that are included in the base product, as they are further used to provide/validate additional business functions.  

    Read the article

  • Checksum Transformation

    The Checksum Transformation computes a hash value, the checksum, across one or more columns, returning the result in the Checksum output column. The transformation provides functionality similar to the T-SQL CHECKSUM function, but is encapsulated within SQL Server Integration Services, for use within the pipeline without code or a SQL Server connection. As featured in The Microsoft Data Warehouse Toolkit by Joy Mundy and Warren Thornthwaite from the Kimbal Group. Have a look at the book samples especially Sample package for custom SCD handling. All input columns are passed through the transformation unaltered, those selected are used to generate the checksum which is passed out through a single output column, Checksum. This does not restrict the number of columns available downstream from the transformation, as columns will always flow through a transformation. The Checksum output column is in addition to all existing columns within the pipeline buffer. The Checksum Transformation uses an algorithm based on the .Net framework GetHashCode method, it is not consistent with the T-SQL CHECKSUM() or BINARY_CHECKSUM() functions. The transformation does not support the following Integration Services data types, DT_NTEXT, DT_IMAGE and DT_BYTES. ChecksumAlgorithm Property There ChecksumAlgorithm property is defined with an enumeration. It was first added in v1.3.0, when the FrameworkChecksum was added. All previous algorithms are still supported for backward compatibility as ChecksumAlgorithm.Original (0). Original - Orginal checksum function, with known issues around column separators and null columns. This was deprecated in the first SQL Server 2005 RTM release. FrameworkChecksum - The hash function is based on the .NET Framework GetHash method for object types. This is based on the .NET Object.GetHashCode() method, which unfortunately differs between x86 and x64 systems. For that reason we now default to the CRC32 option. CRC32 - Using a standard 32-bit cyclic redundancy check (CRC), this provides a more open implementation. The component is provided as an MSI file, however to complete the installation, you will have to add the transformation to the Visual Studio toolbox by hand. This process has been described in detail in the related FAQ entry for How do I install a task or transform component?, just select Checksum from the SSIS Data Flow Items list in the Choose Toolbox Items window. Downloads The Checksum Transformation is available for SQL Server 2005, SQL Server 2008 (includes R2) and SQL Server 2012. Please choose the version to match your SQL Server version, or you can install multiple versions and use them side by side if you have more than one version of SQL Server installed. Checksum Transformation for SQL Server 2005 Checksum Transformation for SQL Server 2008 Checksum Transformation for SQL Server 2012 Version History SQL Server 2012 Version 3.0.0.27 – SQL Server 2012 release. Includes upgrade support for both 2005 and 2008 packages to 2012. (5 Jun 2010) SQL Server 2008 Version 2.0.0.27 – Fix for CRC-32 algorithm that inadvertently made it sort dependent. Fix for race condition which sometimes lead to the error Item has already been added. Key in dictionary: '79764919' . Fix for upgrade mappings between 2005 and 2008. (19 Oct 2010) Version 2.0.0.24 - SQL Server 2008 release. Introduces the new CRC-32 algorithm, which is consistent across x86 and x64.. The default algorithm is now CRC32. (29 Oct 2008) Version 2.0.0.6 - SQL Server 2008 pre-release. This version was released by mistake as part of the site migration, and had known issues. (20 Oct 2008) SQL Server 2005 Version 1.5.0.43 – Fix for CRC-32 algorithm that inadvertently made it sort dependent. Fix for race condition which sometimes lead to the error Item has already been added. Key in dictionary: '79764919' . (19 Oct 2010) Version 1.5.0.16 - Introduces the new CRC-32 algorithm, which is consistent across x86 and x64. The default algorithm is now CRC32. (20 Oct 2008) Version 1.4.0.0 - Installer refresh only. (22 Dec 2007) Version 1.4.0.0 - Refresh for minor UI enhancements. (5 Mar 2006) Version 1.3.0.0 - SQL Server 2005 RTM. The checksum algorithm has changed to improve cardinality when calculating multiple column checksums. The original algorithm is still available for backward compatibility. Fixed custom UI bug with Output column name not persisting. (10 Nov 2005) Version 1.2.0.1 - SQL Server 2005 IDW 15 June CTP. A user interface is provided, as well as the ability to change the checksum output column name. (29 Aug 2005) Version 1.0.0 - Public Release (Beta). (30 Oct 2004) Screenshot

    Read the article

  • In a distributed environment, how can I configure log4j to log to different files for each JVM insta

    - by Renan Mozone
    My application runs on IBM WebSphere 6.1 Network Deployment. The application have several JSP files and Java classes. Today each host have only one JVM instance but my intention is to start another instance on each host. How can I configure log4j to log to different files for each JVM instance in the same host? I thought of using variable substitution on log4j XML configuration file but it only works with system properties. So, it is safe and recommended to set a custom system property just to store the JVM name? Anyone knows another strategy to achieve this in a 'elegant' way?

    Read the article

  • How do I remove a folder from Windows Distributed File System?

    - by digiguru
    We recently moved to a webfarm and setup dfs, only to find a beta application was creating files like there was no tomorrow. 1.2 million files were replicated across the farm, and since then we have prevented the application from creating new files, but every time we try to remove the files, it replaces them on each server because of replication. The process of replacing them actually causes to server to run slowly and in some cases stall. Is there any way we can stop replication at a folder level?

    Read the article

  • How should I name a native DLL distributed in both 32-bit and 64-bit form?

    - by Spike0xff
    I have a commercial product that's a DLL (native 32-bit code), and now it's time to build a 64-bit version of it. So when installing on 64-bit Windows, the 32-bit version goes into Windows\SysWOW64, and the 64-bit version goes into... Windows\System32! (I'm biting my tongue here...) Or the DLL(s) can be installed alongside the client application. What should I name the 64-bit DLL? Same name as 32-bit: Two files that do the same thing, have the same name, but are totally non-interchangeable. Isn't that a recipe for confusion and support problems? Different names (e.g. product.dll and product64.dll): Now client applications have to know whether they are running 32-bit or 64-bit in order to reference my DLL, and there are languages where that isn't known until run-time - .NET being just one example. And now all the statically compiled clients have to conditionalize the import declarations: IF target=WIN64 THEN import Blah from "product64.dll" ELSE import Blah from "product.dll" ENDIF The product contains massive amounts of C code, and a large chunk of C++ - porting it to C# is not an option. Advice? Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How do I do distributed UML development (à la FOSS)?

    - by James A. Rosen
    I have a UML project (built in IBM's Rational System Architect/Modeler, so stored in their XML format) that has grown quite large. Additionally, it now contains several pieces that other groups would like to re-use. I come from a software development (especially FOSS) background, and am trying to understand how to use that as an analogy here. The problem I am grappling with is similar to the Fragile Base Class problem. Let me start with how it works in an object-oriented (say, Java or Ruby) FOSS ecosystem: Group 1 publishes some "core" package, say "net/smtp version 1.0" Group 2 includes Group 1's net/smtp 1.0 package in the vendor library of their software project At some point, Group 1 creates a new 2.0 branch of net/smtp that breaks backwards compatibility (say, it removes an old class or method, or moves a class from one package to another). They tell users of the 1.0 version that it will be deprecated in one year. Group 2, when they have the time, updates to net/smtp 2.0. When they drop in the new package, their compiler (or test suite, for Ruby) tells them about the incompatibility. They do have to make some manual changes, but all of the changes are in the code, in plain text, a medium with which they are quite familiar. Plus, they can often use their IDE's (or text editor's) "global-search-and-replace" function once they figure out what the fixes are. When we try to apply this model to UML in RSA, we run into some problems. RSA supports some fairly powerful refactorings, but they seem to only work if you have write access to all of the pieces. If I rename a class in one package, RSA can rename the references, but only at the same time. It's very difficult to look at the underlying source (the XML) and figure out what's broken. To fix such a problem in the RSA editor itself means tons of clicking on things -- there is no good equivalent of "global-search-and-replace," at least not after an incomplete refactor. They real sticking point seems to be that RSA assumes that you want to do all your editing using their GUI, but that makes certain operations prohibitively difficult. Does anyone have examples of open-source UML projects that have overcome this problem? What strategies do they use for communicating changes?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >