Search Results

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

Page 12/52 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

• SQL Server 2008 : Standard or SQL Express

  - by dr

  Which is a better choice on a development box if you primarily develop Asp.Net applications and SSRS reports. I have never had to use the Express editions, so I don't really know the pros or cons. The cons I have listed for Standard+ editions are: toll it takes on system resources pain to attach database for projects pain to detach unused databases $$$ Pros: You have everything you need Management Studio features Easy move to production

  Read the article

• Why or why not use a DataSource to fill ASP controls?

  - by Brad8118

  So we have a GridView asp control and one of my coworkers doesn't like to use an DataSource to fill the GridView. I wasn't sure if/what the pros and cons are of using one. I don't mind using going through the wizard to set the type, and the select/update methods. Besides using the wizard are there pros and cons?

  Read the article

• Contracting as a Software Developer in the UK

  - by Frez

  Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} Having had some 15 years’ experience of working as a software contractor, I am often asked by developers who work as permanent employees (permies) about the pros and cons of working as a software consultant through my own limited company and whether the move would be a good one for them. Whilst it is possible to contract using other financial vehicles such as umbrella companies, this article will only consider limited companies as that is what I have experience of using. Contracting or consultancy requires a different mind-set from being a permanent member of staff, and not all developers are capable of this shift in attitude. Whilst you can look forward to an increase in the money you take home, there are real risks and expenses you would not normally be exposed to as a permie. So let us have a look at the pros and cons: Pros: More money There is no doubt that whilst you are working on contracts you will earn significantly more than you would as a permanent employee. Furthermore, working through a limited company is more tax efficient. Less politics You really have no need to involve yourself in office politics. When the end of the day comes you can go home and not think or worry about the power struggles within the company you are contracted to. Your career progression is not tied to the company. Expenses from gross income All your expenses of trading as a business will come out of your company’s gross income, i.e. before tax. This covers travelling expenses provided you have not been at the same client/location for more than two years, internet subscriptions, professional subscriptions, software, hardware, accountancy services and so on. Cons: Work is more transient Contracts typically range from a couple of weeks to a year, although will most likely start at 3 months. However, most contracts are extended either because the project you have been brought in to help with takes longer to deliver than expected, the client decides they can use you on other aspects of the project, or the client decides they would like to use you on other projects. The temporary nature of the work means that you will have down-time between contracts while you secure new opportunities during which time your company will have no income. You may need to attend several interviews before securing a new contract. Accountancy expenses Your company is a separate entity and there are accountancy requirements which, unless you like paperwork, means your company will need to appoint an accountant to prepare your company’s accounts. It may also be worth purchasing some accountancy software, so talk to your accountant about this as they may prefer you to use a particular software package so they can integrate it with their systems. VAT You will need to register your company for VAT. This is tax neutral for you as the VAT you charge your clients you will pass onto the government less any VAT you are reclaiming from expenses, but it is additional paperwork to undertake each quarter. It is worth checking out the Fixed Rate VAT Scheme that is available, particularly after the initial expenses of setting up your company are over. No training Clients take you on based on your skills, not to train you when they will lose that investment at the end of the contract, so understand that it is unlikely you will receive any training funded by a client. However, learning new skills during a contract is possible and you may choose to accept a contract on a lower rate if this is guaranteed as it will help secure future contracts. No financial extras You will have no free pension, life, accident, sickness or medical insurance unless you choose to purchase them yourself. A financial advisor can give you all the necessary advice in this area, and it is worth taking seriously. A year after I started as a consultant I contracted a serious illness, this kept me off work for over two months, my client was very understanding and it could have been much worse, so it is worth considering what your options might be in the case of illness, death and retirement. Agencies Whilst it is possible to work directly for end clients there are pros and cons of working through an agency.  The main advantage is cash flow, you invoice the agency and they typically pay you within a week, whereas working directly for a client could have you waiting up to three months to be paid. The downside of working for agencies, especially in the current difficult times, is that they may go out of business and you then have difficulty getting the money you are owed. Tax investigation It is possible that the Inland Revenue may decide to investigate your company for compliance with tax law. Insurance is available to cover you for this. My personal recommendation would be to join the PCG as this insurance is included as a benefit of membership, Professional Indemnity Some agencies require that you are covered by professional indemnity insurance; this is a cost you would not incur as a permie. Travel Unless you live in an area that has an abundance of opportunities, such as central London, it is likely that you will be travelling further, longer and with more expense than if you were permanently employed at a local company. This not only affects you monetarily, but also your quality of life and the ability to keep fit and healthy. Obtaining finance If you want to secure a mortgage on a property it can be more difficult or expensive, especially if you do not have three years of audited accounts to show a mortgage lender.   Caveat This post is my personal opinion and should not be used as a definitive guide or recommendation to contracting and whether it is suitable for you as an individual, i.e. I accept no responsibility if you decide to take up contracting based on this post and you fare badly for whatever reason.

  Read the article

• Question on the implementation of my Entity System

  - by miguel.martin

  I am currently creating an Entity System, in C++, it is almost completed (I have all the code there, I just have to add a few things and test it). The only thing is, I can't figure out how to implement some features. This Entity System is based off a bit from the Artemis framework, however it is different. I'm not sure if I'll be able to type this out the way my head processing it. I'm going to basically ask whether I should do something over something else. Okay, now I'll give a little detail on my Entity System itself. Here are the basic classes that my Entity System uses to actually work: Entity - An Id (and some methods to add/remove/get/etc Components) Component - An empty abstract class ComponentManager - Manages ALL components for ALL entities within a Scene EntitySystem - Processes entities with specific components Aspect - The class that is used to help determine what Components an Entity must contain so a specific EntitySystem can process it EntitySystemManager - Manages all EntitySystems within a Scene EntityManager - Manages entities (i.e. holds all Entities, used to determine whether an Entity has been changed, enables/disables them, etc.) EntityFactory - Creates (and destroys) entities and assigns an ID to them Scene - Contains an EntityManager, EntityFactory, EntitySystemManager and ComponentManager. Has functions to update and initialise the scene. Now in order for an EntitySystem to efficiently know when to check if an Entity is valid for processing (so I can add it to a specific EntitySystem), it must recieve a message from the EntityManager (after a call of activate(Entity& e)). Similarly the EntityManager must know when an Entity is destroyed from the EntityFactory in the Scene, and also the ComponentManager must know when an Entity is created AND destroyed. I do have a Listener/Observer pattern implemented at the moment, but with this pattern I may remove a Listener (which is this case is dependent on the method being called). I mainly have this implemented for specific things related to a game, i.e. Teams, Tagging of entities, etc. So... I was thinking maybe I should call a private method (using friend classes) to send out when an Entity has been activated, deleted, etc. i.e. taken from my EntityFactory void EntityFactory::killEntity(Entity& e) { // if the entity doesn't exsist in the entity manager within the scene if(!getScene()->getEntityManager().doesExsist(e)) { return; // go back to the caller! (should throw an exception or something..) } // tell the ComponentManager and the EntityManager that we killed an Entity getScene()->getComponentManager().doOnEntityWillDie(e); getScene()->getEntityManager().doOnEntityWillDie(e); // notify the listners for(Mouth::iterator i = getMouth().begin(); i != getMouth().end(); ++i) { (*i)->onEntityWillDie(*this, e); } _idPool.addId(e.getId()); // add the ID to the pool delete &e; // delete the entity } As you can see on the lines where I am telling the ComponentManager and the EntityManager that an Entity will die, I am calling a method to make sure it handles it appropriately. Now I realise I could do this without calling it explicitly, with the help of that for loop notifying all listener objects connected to the EntityFactory's Mouth (an object used to tell listeners that there's an event), however is this a good idea (good design, or what)? I've gone over the PROS and CONS, I just can't decide what I want to do. Calling Explicitly: PROS Faster? Since these functions are explicitly called, they can't be "removed" CONS Not flexible Bad design? (friend functions) Calling through Listener objects (i.e. ComponentManager/EntityManager inherits from a EntityFactoryListener) PROS More Flexible? Better Design? CONS Slower? (virtual functions) Listeners can be removed, i.e. may be removed and not get called again during the program, which could cause in a crash. P.S. If you wish to view my current source code, I am hosting it on BitBucket.

  Read the article

• Is this over-abstraction? (And is there a name for it?)

  - by mwhite

  I work on a large Django application that uses CouchDB as a database and couchdbkit for mapping CouchDB documents to objects in Python, similar to Django's default ORM. It has dozens of model classes and a hundred or two CouchDB views. The application allows users to register a "domain", which gives them a unique URL containing the domain name that gives them access to a project whose data has no overlap with the data of other domains. Each document that is part of a domain has its domain property set to that domain's name. As far as relationships between the documents go, all domains are effectively mutually exclusive subsets of the data, except for a few edge cases (some users can be members of more than one domain, and there are some administrative reports that include all domains, etc.). The code is full of explicit references to the domain name, and I'm wondering if it would be worth the added complexity to abstract this out. I'd also like to know if there's a name for the sort of bound property approach I'm taking here. Basically, I have something like this in mind: Before in models.py class User(Document): domain = StringProperty() class Group(Document): domain = StringProperty() name = StringProperty() user_ids = StringListProperty() # method that returns related document set def users(self): return [User.get(id) for id in self.user_ids] # method that queries a couch view optimized for a specific lookup @classmethod def by_name(cls, domain, name): # the view method is provided by couchdbkit and handles # wrapping json CouchDB results as Python objects, and # can take various parameters modifying behavior return cls.view('groups/by_name', key=[domain, name]) # method that creates a related document def get_new_user(self): user = User(domain=self.domain) user.save() self.user_ids.append(user._id) return user in views.py: from models import User, Group # there are tons of views like this, (request, domain, ...) def create_new_user_in_group(request, domain, group_name): group = Group.by_name(domain, group_name)[0] user = User(domain=domain) user.save() group.user_ids.append(user._id) group.save() in group/by_name/map.js: function (doc) { if (doc.doc_type == "Group") { emit([doc.domain, doc.name], null); } } After models.py class DomainDocument(Document): domain = StringProperty() @classmethod def domain_view(cls, *args, **kwargs): kwargs['key'] = [cls.domain.default] + kwargs['key'] return super(DomainDocument, cls).view(*args, **kwargs) @classmethod def get(cls, *args, **kwargs, validate_domain=True): ret = super(DomainDocument, cls).get(*args, **kwargs) if validate_domain and ret.domain != cls.domain.default: raise Exception() return ret def models(self): # a mapping of all models in the application. accessing one returns the equivalent of class BoundUser(User): domain = StringProperty(default=self.domain) class User(DomainDocument): pass class Group(DomainDocument): name = StringProperty() user_ids = StringListProperty() def users(self): return [self.models.User.get(id) for id in self.user_ids] @classmethod def by_name(cls, name): return cls.domain_view('groups/by_name', key=[name]) def get_new_user(self): user = self.models.User() user.save() views.py @domain_view # decorator that sets request.models to the same sort of object that is returned by DomainDocument.models and removes the domain argument from the URL router def create_new_user_in_group(request, group_name): group = request.models.Group.by_name(group_name) user = request.models.User() user.save() group.user_ids.append(user._id) group.save() (Might be better to leave the abstraction leaky here in order to avoid having to deal with a couchapp-style //! include of a wrapper for emit that prepends doc.domain to the key or some other similar solution.) function (doc) { if (doc.doc_type == "Group") { emit([doc.name], null); } } Pros and Cons So what are the pros and cons of this? Pros: DRYer prevents you from creating related documents but forgetting to set the domain. prevents you from accidentally writing a django view - couch view execution path that leads to a security breach doesn't prevent you from accessing underlying self.domain and normal Document.view() method potentially gets rid of the need for a lot of sanity checks verifying whether two documents whose domains we expect to be equal are. Cons: adds some complexity hides what's really happening requires no model modules to have classes with the same name, or you would need to add sub-attributes to self.models for modules. However, requiring project-wide unique class names for models should actually be fine because they correspond to the doc_type property couchdbkit uses to decide which class to instantiate them as, which should be unique. removes explicit dependency documentation (from group.models import Group)

  Read the article

• A layout for maven project with a patched dependency

  - by zamza

  Suppose, I have an opensource project that depends on some library, that must be patched in order to fix some issues. How do I do that? My ideas are: Have that library sources set up as a module, keep them in my vcs. Pros: simple. Cons: some third party sources in my repo, might slow down build process, hard to find a patched place (though can be fixed in README) Have a module, like in 1, but keep patched source files only, compile them with orignal library jar in classpath and somehow replace *.class files in library jar on build. Pros: builds faster, easy to find patched places. Cons: hard to configure, that jar hackery is non-obvious (library jar in repository and in my project assembly would be different) Keep patched *.class files in main/resources, and replace on packaging like in 2). Pros: almost none. Cons: binaries in vcs, hard to recompile a patched class as patch compilation is not automated. One nice solution is to create a distinct project with patched library sources, and deploy it on local/enterprise repository with -patched qualifier. But that would not fit for an opensourced project that is meant to be easily buildable by anyone who checks out its sources. Or should I just say "and also, before you build my project, please check out that stuff and run mvn install".

  Read the article

• Database structure - is mySQL the right choice?

  - by Industrial

  Hi everyone, We are currently planning the database structure of a quite complex e-commerce web app that has flexibility as it's main cornerstone. Our app features a large amount of data (products) and we have run into a slight headache trying to keep performance high without compromizing normalization rules in the database, or leaving our highly beloved flexibility concept behind when integrating product options (also widely known as product attributes or parameters). Based on various references and sources available, we have made up lists on pros and cons of all major and well known database patterns to solve this. After comparing these, we have come up with two final alternatives: EAV (Entity-attribute-value model) : Pros: Database is used for all sorting. Cons: All related queries will include a number of joins between multiple tables in order to complete the collection of data. SLOB (Serialized LOB, also known as Facade?) : Pros: Very flexible. Keeping the number of necessary joins low compared to a EAV design pattern. Easy to update/add/remove data from each product. Cons: All sorting will be done by the application instead of the database. Will use lots of performance (memory?) when big datasets is processed by a large number of users. Our main questions: Which pattern/structure would you use, or maybe even a different solution? Is there better databases besides mySQL available nowadays to accomplish what we want? Thanks a lot! Reference: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/695752/product-table-many-kinds-of-product-each-product-has-many-parameters

  Read the article

• Groovy as a substitute for Java when using BigDecimal?

  - by geejay

  I have just completed an evaluation of Java, Groovy and Scala. The factors I considered were: readability, precision The factors I would like to know: performance, ease of integration I needed a BigDecimal level of precision. Here are my results: Java void someOp() { BigDecimal del_theta_1 = toDec(6); BigDecimal del_theta_2 = toDec(2); BigDecimal del_theta_m = toDec(0); del_theta_m = abs(del_theta_1.subtract(del_theta_2)) .divide(log(del_theta_1.divide(del_theta_2))); } Groovy void someOp() { def del_theta_1 = 6.0 def del_theta_2 = 2.0 def del_theta_m = 0.0 del_theta_m = Math.abs(del_theta_1 - del_theta_2) / Math.log(del_theta_1 / del_theta_2); } Scala def other(){ var del_theta_1 = toDec(6); var del_theta_2 = toDec(2); var del_theta_m = toDec(0); del_theta_m = ( abs(del_theta_1 - del_theta_2) / log(del_theta_1 / del_theta_2) ) } Note that in Java and Scala I used static imports. Java: Pros: it is Java Cons: no operator overloading (lots o methods), barely readable/codeable Groovy: Pros: default BigDecimal means no visible typing, least surprising BigDecimal support for all operations (division included) Cons: another language to learn Scala: Pros: has operator overloading for BigDecimal Cons: some surprising behaviour with division (fixed with Decimal128), another language to learn

  Read the article

• Inline function v. Macro in C -- What's the Overhead (Memory/Speed)?

  - by Jason R. Mick

  I searched Stack Overflow for the pros/cons of function-like macros v. inline functions. I found the following discussion: Pros and Cons of Different macro function / inline methods in C ...but it didn't answer my primary burning question. Namely, what is the overhead in c of using a macro function (with variables, possibly other function calls) v. an inline function, in terms of memory usage and execution speed? Are there any compiler-dependent differences in overhead? I have both icc and gcc at my disposal. My code snippet I'm modularizing is: double AttractiveTerm = pow(SigmaSquared/RadialDistanceSquared,3); double RepulsiveTerm = AttractiveTerm * AttractiveTerm; EnergyContribution += 4 * Epsilon * (RepulsiveTerm - AttractiveTerm); My reason for turning it into an inline function/macro is so I can drop it into a c file and then conditionally compile other similar, but slightly different functions/macros. e.g.: double AttractiveTerm = pow(SigmaSquared/RadialDistanceSquared,3); double RepulsiveTerm = pow(SigmaSquared/RadialDistanceSquared,9); EnergyContribution += 4 * Epsilon * (RepulsiveTerm - AttractiveTerm); (note the difference in the second line...) This function is a central one to my code and gets called thousands of times per step in my program and my program performs millions of steps. Thus I want to have the LEAST overhead possible, hence why I'm wasting time worrying about the overhead of inlining v. transforming the code into a macro. Based on the prior discussion I already realize other pros/cons (type independence and resulting errors from that) of macros... but what I want to know most, and don't currently know is the PERFORMANCE. I know some of you C veterans will have some great insight for me!!

  Read the article

• Should I *always* import my file references into the database in drupal?

  - by sprugman

  I have a cck type with an image field, and a unique_id text field. The file name of the image is based on the unique_id. All of the content, including the image itself is being generated automatically via another process, and I'm parsing what that generates into nodes. Rather than creating separate fields for the id and the image, and doing an official import of the image into the files table, I'm tempted to only create the id field and create the file reference in the theme layer. I can think of pros and cons: 1) Theme Layer Approach Pros: makes the import process much less complex don't have to worry about syncing the db with the file system as things change more flexible -- I can move my images around more easily if I want Cons: maybe not as much The Drupal Way™ not as pure -- I'll wind up with more logic on the theme side. 2) Import Approach Pros: import method is required if we ever wanted to make the files private (we won't.) safer? Maybe I'll know if there's a problem with the image at import time, rather than view time. Since I'll be bulk importing, that might make a difference. if I delete a node through the admin interface, drupal might be able to delete the file for me, as well. Con: more complex import and maintenance All else being equal, simpler is always better, so I'm leaning toward #1. Are there any other issues I'm missing? (Since this is an open ended question, I guess I'll make it a community wiki, whatever that means.)

  Read the article

• Building a structure/object in a place other than the constructor

  - by Vishal Naidu

  I have different types of objects representing the same business entity. UIObject, PowershellObject, DevCodeModelObject, WMIObject all are different representation to the same entity. So say if the entity is Animal then I have AnimalUIObject, AnimalPSObject, AnimalModelObject, AnimalWMIObject, etc. Now the implementations of AnimalUIObject, AnimalPSObject, AnimalModelObject are all in separate assemblies. Now my scenario is I want to verify the contents of business entity Animal irrespective of the assembly it came from. So I created a GenericAnimal class to represent the Animal entity. Now in GenericAnimal I added the following constructors: GenericAnimal(AnimalUIObject) GenericAnimal(AnimalPSObject) GenericAnimal(AnimalModelObject) Basically I made GenericAnimal depend on all the underlying assemblies so that while verifying I deal with this abstraction. Now the other approach to do this is have GenericAnimal with an empty constructor an allow these underlying assemblies to have a Transform() method which would build the GenericAnimal. Both approaches have some pros and cons: The 1st approach: Pros: All construction logic is in one place in one class GenericAnimal Cons: GenericAnimal class must be touched every-time there is a new representation form. The 2nd approach: Pros: construction responsibility is delegated to the underlying assembly. Cons: As construction logic is spread accross assemblies, tomorrow if I need to add a property X in GenericAnimal then I have to touch all the assemblies to change the Transform method. Which approach looks better ? or Which would you consider a lesser evil ? Is there any alternative way better than the above two ?

  Read the article

• Cool machine name for your personal computer.

  - by WooYek

  I hate those auto-generated names or those "joes-computer" ones. I always try to come up with something funny for my personal computer name. Looking for inspiration here. What are the coolest names you came up with?

  Read the article

• What is better MS HyperV or VMWare ESX?

  - by JD

  I'm looking for a list of pros / cons to compare MS HyperV against VMWare ESX for Virtual Server hosting.

  Read the article

• Socket 1155 vs 2011 vs Haswell

  - by woody

  The title says it all. I am trying to decide between sockets and just cant pinpoint which to get based on pros and cons. The build this will go into will be my primary PC. It will be used for every day computing, coding, some multimedia and gaming. I have read that 1155 and 2011 will be dead within the new year and that Haswell will double the performance of Ivy Bridge. What is a general run down on the different sockets? Pros and Cons? More specifically what are the technical differences between the three?

  Read the article

• Mac Joining Active Directory Still Prompts For Authentication

  - by David Potter

  My Mac is joined to an Active Directory domain. What I expected to see was the same ease of access to file shares and internal websites that Windows computers joined to the domain experience (i.e., no authentication needed; it just uses Windows Integrated Authentication). Instead I am asked for credentials each time I try to access those shares and protected websites (e.g. SharePoint). Is this normal behavior, or is something wrong with my Mac that it prompts me for my username and password for the domain when I access Windows file shares or intranet sites protected by NTLM/Kerberos? Machines include: MacBook Pros running Mountain Lion MacBook Pros running Lion MacServer running Lion Server

  Read the article

• Recommendations or advice for shared computer control

  - by Telemachus

  Basic scenario: we are a school (overwhelmingly Mac, some Windows machines via BootCamp), and we are considering using DeepFreeze to guard the state of our shared machines. We have roughly 250 machines that are either shared laptops (which move around quite a bit) or common desktops in public spaces. Obviously, we spend a lot of time maintaining the machines and trying to reverse the inevitable drift as people make changes to the computers. We would like to control the integrity of the build we initially put onto the machines without handcuffing users and especially without using Mac's Parental Control software. (We've had nothing but bad experiences with it.) We've been testing DeepFreeze, and so far it's very impressive. But I'm curious to hear if people who have used DeepFreeze or any similar software have any advice or tips. To get things started, I will post my own pros and cons. Pros: The state of the machine is frozen in our chosen state. All changes made to the machine after that disappear upon restart. (This frozen state really appears to cover everything. I have yet to do something to a test machine that isn't instantly healed.) Tons of trivial but time-consuming maintenance is gone in an instant. Also, lots of not-so-trivial breakage should be avoided. There are good options, however, that allow you to create storage spaces either globally or per user. (Otherwise, stored files disappear upon reboot. For some machines, this is a good option itself. Simply warn people: save externally or else; this machine is a kiosk, not your storage space.) Cons: Anytime we actually need to make a change (upgrade basic software, add a printer or an airport permanently, add new software), the process is a bit more complex. Reboot into a special mode (thaw state), make changes, reboot back into frozen mode. If (when?) we forget this, we will end up making changes that disappear after the next reboot. Users will forget to save files correctly (in the right place or externally), and we will have loud, unpleasant conversations explaining that we can't recover the document they worked on all afternoon yesterday. The machine rebooted. The file is gone. These are my initial thoughts, but I would love to hear from other people who have experience with DeepFreeze or any similar software. What should we be careful about? Do the pros outweigh the cons? What gains or problems am I not seeing? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Mutliple VMs for Tomcat cluster vs Multiple Tomcat instances on one physical box

  - by Greymeister

  I'm working on a project that will be implemented into production using a cluster of Apache Tomcat instances and I'm looking for the best Hardware/OS solutions and VMs have come up as one option. I have run ESXi/ESX instances before for development and testing, but I'm curious for a hosting environment if having multiple VMs is actually worse than just configuring a server to host multiple instances of Tomcat. These are my guesses: Pros for VMWare Easier Maintenance/Backup for individual VMs (VMWare makes this easy) Can remote login to individual VMs without having to give host access (security?) Easier way to re-purpose machine for OS/Hardware changes Pros for running on one Physical Machine Overhead of only one OS (also no VMWare footprint) Update OS/security changes once One less administrative layer (No VM expertise required) I'm curious if anyone has any other ideas about what the benefits would be for either option.

  Read the article

• What is this service called in English?

  - by moomoochoo

  DETAILS I'm not familiar with server administration and am trying to find the name of a particular service offered by a Japanese website provider. The service is for a dedicated server. I have attached a picture detailing the service below. The left side of the picture shows the server without the service. The right side shows the server with the service. Once I know the name of the service I will Google it, but any additional information in regards to the pros and cons of such a service would be much appreciated. Thanks! QUESTION What is the name of the service in the picture. What are the pros and cons of this service?

  Read the article

• SQL server environment

  - by Olegas D

  Hello I'm considering a bit of changes in current sales environment. And trying to check all cons and pros. Current situation. SQL server (quite decent HP server - server1) + backup server (smaller Dell server - server2). all sql files and sql server itself are on the server1. If something goes wrong with server1 I will have to manually move to server2. Connecting to the sql server: 1 HQ (where server located) + 4 sites through VPN. Now I'm considering 2 scenarios: Buy some storage system + update existing servers (add ram, upgrade processors) and go for VMWare ESXI. Rent a server at a datacenter + rent virtual server in case real server goes down. Also rent some space at data storage to keep SQL files there. Have anyone considered these things and maybe found some good pros/cons list? ;) Thanks

  Read the article

• Best Method to SFTP or FTPS Files via SSIS

  - by Registered User

  What is the best method using SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services) to upload a file to either a remote SFTP (secure FTP with SSH2 protocal) or FTPS (FTP over SSL) site? I've used the following methods, but each has short-comings I would like to avoid: COZYROC LIBRARY Method: Install the CozyRoc library on each development and production server and use the SFTP task to upload the files. Pros: Easy to use. It looks, smells, and feels like a normal SSIS task. SSIS also recognizes the password as sensitive information and allows you all the normal options for protecting the sensitive information instead of just storing it in clear text in a non-secure manner. Works well with other SSIS tasks such as ForEach Loop Containers. Errors out when uploads and downloads fail. Works well when you don't know the names of the files on the remote FTP site to download or when you won't know the name of the file to upload until run-time. Cons: Costs money to license in a production environment. Makes you dependent upon the vendor to update their libraries between each version. Although they already have a 2008 version, this caused me a problem during the CTP's of 2008. Requires installing the libraries on each development and production machine. COMMAND LINE SFTP PROGRAM Method: Install a free command-line SFTP application such as Putty and execute it either by running a batch file or operating system process task. Pros: Free, free, and free. You can be sure it is secure if you are using Putty since numerous GUI FTP clients appear to use Putty under the covers. You DEFINATELY know you are using SSH2 and not SSH. Cons: The two command-line utilities I tried (Putty and Cygwin) required storing the SFTP password in a non-secure location. I haven't found a good way to capture failures or errors when uploading files. The process doesn't look and smell like SSIS. Most of the code is encapsulated in text files instead of SSIS itself. Difficult to use if you don't know the exact name of the file you are uploading or downloading. A 3RD PARTY C# or VB.NET LIBRARY Method: Install a SFTP or FTPS library and use a Script Task that references the library to upload the files. (I've never tried this, so I'm going to guess at the pros and cons) Pros: Probably easy to capture errors. Should work well with variables, so it would probably be easy to use even when you don't know the exact name of the file you are uploading or downloading. Cons: It's a script task combined with .NET libraries. If you are using SSIS, then you probably are more comfortable with SSIS tasks then .NET code. Script tasks are also difficult to troubleshoot since they don't have the same debugging tools and features as regular .NET projects. Creates a dependency on 3rd party code that may not work between different versions of SQL Server. To be fair, it is probably MORE likely to work between different versions of SQL Server than a 3rd party SSIS task library. Another huge con -- I haven't found a free C# or VB.NET library that does this as of yet. So if anyone knows of one, then please let me know!

  Read the article

• Recommended integration mechanism for bi-directional, authenticated, encrypted connection in C clien

  - by rcampbell

  Let me first give an example. Imagine you have a single server running a JVM application. This server keeps a collection of N equations, once for each client: Client #1: 2x Client #2: 1 + y Client #3: z/4 This server includes an HTTP interface so that random visitors can type https://www.acme.com/client/3 int their browsers and see the latest evaluated result of z/4. The tricky part is that either the client or the server may change the variable value at any time, informing the other party immediately. More specifically, Client #3 - a C app - can initially tell the server that z = 20. An hour later that same client informs the server that z = 23. Likewise the server can later inform the client that z = 28. As caf pointed out in the comments, there can be a race condition when values are changed by the client and server simultaneously. The solution would be for both client and server to send the operation performed in their message, which would need to be executed by the other party. To keep things simple, let's limit the operations to (commutative) addition, allowing us to disregard message ordering. For example, the client seeds the server with z = 20: server:z=20, client:z=20 server sends {+3} message (so z=23 locally) & client sends {-2} message (so z=18 locally) at the exact same time server receives {-2} message at some point, adds to his local copy so z=21 client receives {+3} message at some point, adds to his local copy so z=21 As long as all messages are eventually evaluated by both parties, the correct answer will eventually be given to the users of the client and server since we limited ourselves to commutative operations (addition of 3 and -2). This does mean that both client and server can be returning incorrect answers in the time it takes for messages to be exchanged and processed. While undesirable, I believe this is unavoidable. Some possible implementations of this idea include: Open an encrypted, always on TCP socket connection for communication Pros: no additional infrastructure needed, client and server know immediately if there is a problem (disconnect) with the other party, fairly straightforward (except the the encryption), native support from both JVM and C platforms Cons: pretty low-level so you end up writing a lot yourself (protocol, delivery verification, retry-on-failure logic), probably have a lot of firewall headaches during client app installation Asynchronous messaging (ex: ActiveMQ) Pros: transactional, both C & Java integration, free up the client and server apps from needing retry logic or delivery verification, pretty straightforward encryption, easy extensibility via message filters/routers/etc Cons: need additional infrastructure (message server) which must never fail, Database or file system as asynchronous integration point Same pros/cons as above but messier RESTful Web Service Pros: simple, possible reuse of the server's existing REST API, SSL figures out the encryption problem for you (maybe use RSA key a la GitHub for authentication?) Cons: Client now needs to run a C HTTP REST server w/SSL, client and server need retry logic. Axis2 has both a Java and C version, but you may be limited to SOAP. What other techniques should I be evaluating? What real world experiences have you had with these mechanisms? Which do you recommend for this problem and why?

  Read the article

• Custom Online Backup Solution Advice

  - by Martín Marconcini

  I have to implement a way so our customers can backup their SQL 2000/5/8 databasase online. The application they use is a C#/.NET35 Winforms application that connects to a SQL Server (can be 2000/2005/2008, sometimes express editions). The SQL Server is on the same LAN. Our application has a very specific UI and we must code each form following those guidelines. There’s lots of GDI+ to give it the look and feel we want. For that reason, using a 3rd party application is not a very good idea. We need to charge the customer on a monthly/annual basis for the service. Preferably, the customer doesn’t need to care about bandwidth and storage space. It must be transparent. Given the above reqs., my first thoughts are: Solution 1: Code some sort of FTP basic functionality with behind the scenes SQL Backup mechanism, then hire a Hosting service and compress-transfer the .BAK to the Hosting. Maintain a series of Folders (for each customer). They won’t see what’s happening. They will just see a list of their files and a big “Backup now” button that will perform the SQL backup, compress it and upload it (and update the file list) ;) Pros: Not very complicated to implement, simple to use, fairly simple to configure (could have a dedicated ftp user/pass) Cons: Finding a “ftp” only hosting plan is not probably going to be easy, they usually come with a bunch of stuff. FTP is not always the best protocol. more? Solution 2: Similar to 1, but instead of FTP, find a cloud computing service like Amazon S3, Mosso or similar. Pros: Cloud Storage is fast, reliable, etc. It’s kind of easy to implement (specially if there are APIs like AWS or Mosso). Cons: I have been unable to come up with a service optimized for resellers where I can give multiple sub-accounts (one for each customer). Billing is going to be a nightmare cuz these services bill per/GB and with One account it’s impossible to differentiate each customer. Solution 3: Similar to 2, but letting the user create their own account on Amazon S3 (for example). Pros: You forget about billing and such. Cons: A mess for the customer who has to open the Amazon (or whatever) account, will be charged for that and not from you. You can’t really charge the customer (since you’re just not doing anything). Solution 4: Use one of the many backup online solutions that use the tech in cloud storage. Pros: many of these include SQL Server backup, and a lot of features that we’d have to implement. Plus web access and stuff like that will come included. Cons: Still have the billing problem described in number 2. Little of these companies (if any) offers “reseller” accounts. You have to eventually use their software (some offer certain branding). Any better approach? Summary: You have a software (.NET Winapp). You want your users to be able to backup their SQL Server databases online (and be able to retrieve the backups if needed). You ideally would like to charge the customer for this service (i.e. XX € a year).

  Read the article

• Should we enforce code style in our large codebase?

  - by eighttrackmind

  By "code style" I mean 2 things: Style, eg. // bad if(foo){ ... } // good if (foo) { ... } Conventions and idiomaticity, where two ways of writing the same thing are functionally equivalent, but one is more idiomatic. eg. // bad if (fooLib.equals(a, b)) { ... } // good if (a == b) { ... } I think it makes sense to use an auto-formatter to enforce #1 automatically. So my question is specifically about #2. I like to break things down into pros and cons, here's what I've come up with so far: Pros: Used by many large codebases (eg. Google, jQuery) Helps make it a bit easier to work on new areas of the codebase Helps make code more portable (this is not necessarily true) Code style is automatic once you get used to it Makes it easier to fast-decline pull requests Cons: Takes engineers’ and code reviewers’ time away from more important things (like developing features) Code should ideally be rewritten every 2-3 years anyway, so it’s more important to focus on getting the architecture right, and achieving high test coverage Adds strain to code reviews (eg. “don’t do it this way, I like this other way better”) Even if I’ve been using a code style for a while, I still sometime have to pause and think about how to write a line better Having an enforced, uniform code style makes it hard to experiment with potentially better styles Maintaining a style guide takes a lot of incremental effort Engineers rarely read through the style guide. More often, it's cited in code reviews And as a secondary question: we also have many smaller repositories - should the same code style be enforced there?

  Read the article

• Dilemma for growing a project: Open source volunteer developers VS closed source paid / revshare developers? [closed]

  - by giorgio79

  I am trying to grow my project, and I am vaccillating between some examples. Some options seem to be: 1. open sourcing the project to draw volunteer developers. Pros This would mean anyone can try and make some money off the code that would motivate them to contribute back and grow the project. Cons Existing bigger could easily copy and paste my work so far. They can also replicate without having access to the code, but that would take more time. I also thought of using AGPL license, but again, code can still be copied without redistribution. After all, enforcing a license costs a lot of money, and I cannot just say to a possible copycat that it seems you copied my code, show me what you got. 2. Keep the project closed source, but create some kind of a developer program where they get revshare Pros I keep the main rights for the project, but still generate interest by creating a developer program. Noone can copy code easily, just with some considerable effort, but make contributions easy as a breeze. I am also seeing many companies just open source a part of their projects, like Acquia does not open source its multisite setup, or github does not open source some of its core business. Cons Less attention from open source committed devs. Conclusion So option 2 seems the most secure, but would love some feedback.

  Read the article

• Node.js MMO - process and/or map division

  - by Gipsy King

  I am in the phase of designing a mmo browser based game (certainly not massive, but all connected players are in the same universe), and I am struggling with finding a good solution to the problem of distributing players across processes. I'm using node.js with socket.io. I have read this helpful article, but I would like some advice since I am also concerned with different processes. Solution 1: Tie a process to a map location (like a map-cell), connect players to the process corresponding to their location. When a player performs an action, transmit it to all other players in this process. When a player moves away, he will eventually have to connect to another process (automatically). Pros: Easier to implement Cons: Must divide map into zones Player reconnection when moving into a different zone is probably annoying If one zone/process is always busy (has players in it), it doesn't really load-balance, unless I split the zone which may not be always viable There shouldn't be any visible borders Solution 1b: Same as 1, but connect processes of bordering cells, so that players on the other side of the border are visible and such. Maybe even let them interact. Solution 2: Spawn processes on demand, unrelated to a location. Have one special process to keep track of all connected player handles, their location, and the process they're connected to. Then when a player performs an action, the process finds all other nearby players (from the special player-process-location tracking node), and instructs their matching processes to relay the action. Pros: Easy load balancing: spawn more processes Avoids player reconnecting / borders between zones Cons: Harder to implement and test Additional steps of finding players, and relaying event/action to another process If the player-location-process tracking process fails, all other fail too I would like to hear if I'm missing something, or completely off track.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >