Search Results

Search found 39497 results on 1580 pages for 'two shoes'.

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 154/1580 | < Previous Page | 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161  | Next Page >

  • Does Google consider my blog page as duplicate page if that page URL and that page URL with ‘showcomment’ cached separately?

    - by John Sanjay
    While I’m searching all the index page of my blog I found that Google cached one of my blog page http://example.com/page.html as well as http://example.com/page.html?showComment=1372054729698 These two pages are showing while I searched site:http://example.com. I’m so afraid about it because these two pages are same with same content. Does google consider these two pages as duplicate? If so what can I do now? Is it really a big problem to my blog?

    Read the article

  • What is controlling the desktop display?

    - by Bart Silverstrim
    I have two Ubuntu systems and in the course of changing configurations something has become muddled. I have disabled Unity in favor of gnome shell, the older style display of the desktop. Then I installed xfce 4. Seemed everything would be working okay, and for the most part it does. Except I noticed that on one system there's something else controlling settings. On one, if I right click the desktop, I get the menu with the options: open in new window create launcher... create url link... create folder... create from template -> open terminal here paste desktop settings... properties... applications -> On system two, right clicking brings up the menu: Create new folder Create new document -> organize desktop by name keep aligned paste Change Desktop Background Additionally, even though I set the background with the xfce settings manager, on system two that background will appear for a few seconds before it's replaced by something that looks like a background from Ubuntu's original desktop. And it's being controlled by what comes up with the "change desktop background" when right clicking, which isn't the xfce settings manager. On the first system, that right click does bring up the xfce settings tool. In short, something is controlling/overriding the xfce settings on machine two, but I can't find what file or configuration tool is doing it. How can I get system two to behave as system one, giving control of settings and configuration of X to XFCE's tools?

    Read the article

  • Tip 16 : Open Multiple Documents within Single Application Instance Using C#

    - by StanleyGu
    1.       Using Microsoft Word 2007 as an example, you can open test1.docx and test2.docx at same time. The two documents are opened within single instance of the word application. World application supports command line argument of passing multiple documents. 2.       Again, Using Microsoft Word 2007 as an example, you can open test1.docx first and then test2.docx. The two documents are opened within single instance of the Word application. Word application supports Multiple Document Interface (MDI). 3.       Using Notepad as an example, you receive error message of “The filename, directory name, or volume label syntax is incorrect” if you want to open two documents at the same time. Notepad does not support command line argument of passing multiple documents 4.       Again, using Notepad as an example, you can open test1.txt first and then test2.txt. The two documents are opened to two different instances of Notepad application. Notepad does not support Multiple Document Interface (MDI). 5.       In conclusion, there is nothing you can do trying to rely on System.Diagnostics.Process class to open multiple documents within a single instance of an application because it is controlled by the application itself. The best approach is to read any developer or user guide of the application and make sure: 1. The application supports Multiple Document Interface (MDI) 2. The application provides command line argument of passing multiple documents. Then, you can use Process class and the command line argument syntax to open multiple documents for the application.  

    Read the article

  • access localhost from other PC

    - by user109694
    I'm fresher for ubuntu 12.04.., I just created a simple program called login.php and i would like to run this prog from anther PC that not in my LAN. I had localhost in my system., I'm using apache2.0 and php5. My program is located at var/www/login.php When ever i'm trying to open it from others PC(not in my network) using IP it shoes OOPS., What can i do to open my page from another PC using IP address.

    Read the article

  • Paste a list of dates in format of "mm/dd/yy" to iWork-Numbers

    - by David.Chu.ca
    I have trouble to paste a list of strings in the format of 'mm/dd/yy' into iWork-Numbers. For example, I have a list of strings(text in VIM): 04/01/10 04/03/10 04/13/10 I copy those strings and then paste into my iWork-Numbers worksheet. The result will be: 2004-01-10 2004-03-10 04/13/10 It looks like that Numbers (mac workseet application in iWork) tries to convert the first two digits into year, then the next two into month if less than 12 and last two digits to a day, for the first two rows. For the third(04/13/10), since the middle two digits are 13 and cannot be a month, then this row is pasted as it is (actually it is what I need). Is there any way to paste whatever as they are, without any "smart date conversion"? Do I have to change settings in Numberers or Mac OS's System preference?

    Read the article

  • Table Variables: an empirical approach.

    - by Phil Factor
    It isn’t entirely a pleasant experience to publish an article only to have it described on Twitter as ‘Horrible’, and to have it criticized on the MVP forum. When this happened to me in the aftermath of publishing my article on Temporary tables recently, I was taken aback, because these critics were experts whose views I respect. What was my crime? It was, I think, to suggest that, despite the obvious quirks, it was best to use Table Variables as a first choice, and to use local Temporary Tables if you hit problems due to these quirks, or if you were doing complex joins using a large number of rows. What are these quirks? Well, table variables have advantages if they are used sensibly, but this requires some awareness by the developer about the potential hazards and how to avoid them. You can be hit by a badly-performing join involving a table variable. Table Variables are a compromise, and this compromise doesn’t always work out well. Explicit indexes aren’t allowed on Table Variables, so one cannot use covering indexes or non-unique indexes. The query optimizer has to make assumptions about the data rather than using column distribution statistics when a table variable is involved in a join, because there aren’t any column-based distribution statistics on a table variable. It assumes a reasonably even distribution of data, and is likely to have little idea of the number of rows in the table variables that are involved in queries. However complex the heuristics that are used might be in determining the best way of executing a SQL query, and they most certainly are, the Query Optimizer is likely to fail occasionally with table variables, under certain circumstances, and produce a Query Execution Plan that is frightful. The experienced developer or DBA will be on the lookout for this sort of problem. In this blog, I’ll be expanding on some of the tests I used when writing my article to illustrate the quirks, and include a subsequent example supplied by Kevin Boles. A simplified example. We’ll start out by illustrating a simple example that shows some of these characteristics. We’ll create two tables filled with random numbers and then see how many matches we get between the two tables. We’ll forget indexes altogether for this example, and use heaps. We’ll try the same Join with two table variables, two table variables with OPTION (RECOMPILE) in the JOIN clause, and with two temporary tables. It is all a bit jerky because of the granularity of the timing that isn’t actually happening at the millisecond level (I used DATETIME). However, you’ll see that the table variable is outperforming the local temporary table up to 10,000 rows. Actually, even without a use of the OPTION (RECOMPILE) hint, it is doing well. What happens when your table size increases? The table variable is, from around 30,000 rows, locked into a very bad execution plan unless you use OPTION (RECOMPILE) to provide the Query Analyser with a decent estimation of the size of the table. However, if it has the OPTION (RECOMPILE), then it is smokin’. Well, up to 120,000 rows, at least. It is performing better than a Temporary table, and in a good linear fashion. What about mixed table joins, where you are joining a temporary table to a table variable? You’d probably expect that the query analyzer would throw up its hands and produce a bad execution plan as if it were a table variable. After all, it knows nothing about the statistics in one of the tables so how could it do any better? Well, it behaves as if it were doing a recompile. And an explicit recompile adds no value at all. (we just go up to 45000 rows since we know the bigger picture now)   Now, if you were new to this, you might be tempted to start drawing conclusions. Beware! We’re dealing with a very complex beast: the Query Optimizer. It can come up with surprises What if we change the query very slightly to insert the results into a Table Variable? We change nothing else and just measure the execution time of the statement as before. Suddenly, the table variable isn’t looking so much better, even taking into account the time involved in doing the table insert. OK, if you haven’t used OPTION (RECOMPILE) then you’re toast. Otherwise, there isn’t much in it between the Table variable and the temporary table. The table variable is faster up to 8000 rows and then not much in it up to 100,000 rows. Past the 8000 row mark, we’ve lost the advantage of the table variable’s speed. Any general rule you may be formulating has just gone for a walk. What we can conclude from this experiment is that if you join two table variables, and can’t use constraints, you’re going to need that Option (RECOMPILE) hint. Count Dracula and the Horror Join. These tables of integers provide a rather unreal example, so let’s try a rather different example, and get stuck into some implicit indexing, by using constraints. What unusual words are contained in the book ‘Dracula’ by Bram Stoker? Here we get a table of all the common words in the English language (60,387 of them) and put them in a table. We put them in a Table Variable with the word as a primary key, a Table Variable Heap and a Table Variable with a primary key. We then take all the distinct words used in the book ‘Dracula’ (7,558 of them). We then create a table variable and insert into it all those uncommon words that are in ‘Dracula’. i.e. all the words in Dracula that aren’t matched in the list of common words. To do this we use a left outer join, where the right-hand value is null. The results show a huge variation, between the sublime and the gorblimey. If both tables contain a Primary Key on the columns we join on, and both are Table Variables, it took 33 Ms. If one table contains a Primary Key, and the other is a heap, and both are Table Variables, it took 46 Ms. If both Table Variables use a unique constraint, then the query takes 36 Ms. If neither table contains a Primary Key and both are Table Variables, it took 116383 Ms. Yes, nearly two minutes!! If both tables contain a Primary Key, one is a Table Variables and the other is a temporary table, it took 113 Ms. If one table contains a Primary Key, and both are Temporary Tables, it took 56 Ms.If both tables are temporary tables and both have primary keys, it took 46 Ms. Here we see table variables which are joined on their primary key again enjoying a  slight performance advantage over temporary tables. Where both tables are table variables and both are heaps, the query suddenly takes nearly two minutes! So what if you have two heaps and you use option Recompile? If you take the rogue query and add the hint, then suddenly, the query drops its time down to 76 Ms. If you add unique indexes, then you've done even better, down to half that time. Here are the text execution plans.So where have we got to? Without drilling down into the minutiae of the execution plans we can begin to create a hypothesis. If you are using table variables, and your tables are relatively small, they are faster than temporary tables, but as the number of rows increases you need to do one of two things: either you need to have a primary key on the column you are using to join on, or else you need to use option (RECOMPILE) If you try to execute a query that is a join, and both tables are table variable heaps, you are asking for trouble, well- slow queries, unless you give the table hint once the number of rows has risen past a point (30,000 in our first example, but this varies considerably according to context). Kevin’s Skew In describing the table-size, I used the term ‘relatively small’. Kevin Boles produced an interesting case where a single-row table variable produces a very poor execution plan when joined to a very, very skewed table. In the original, pasted into my article as a comment, a column consisted of 100000 rows in which the key column was one number (1) . To this was added eight rows with sequential numbers up to 9. When this was joined to a single-tow Table Variable with a key of 2 it produced a bad plan. This problem is unlikely to occur in real usage, and the Query Optimiser team probably never set up a test for it. Actually, the skew can be slightly less extreme than Kevin made it. The following test showed that once the table had 54 sequential rows in the table, then it adopted exactly the same execution plan as for the temporary table and then all was well. Undeniably, real data does occasionally cause problems to the performance of joins in Table Variables due to the extreme skew of the distribution. We've all experienced Perfectly Poisonous Table Variables in real live data. As in Kevin’s example, indexes merely make matters worse, and the OPTION (RECOMPILE) trick does nothing to help. In this case, there is no option but to use a temporary table. However, one has to note that once the slight de-skew had taken place, then the plans were identical across a huge range. Conclusions Where you need to hold intermediate results as part of a process, Table Variables offer a good alternative to temporary tables when used wisely. They can perform faster than a temporary table when the number of rows is not great. For some processing with huge tables, they can perform well when only a clustered index is required, and when the nature of the processing makes an index seek very effective. Table Variables are scoped to the batch or procedure and are unlikely to hang about in the TempDB when they are no longer required. They require no explicit cleanup. Where the number of rows in the table is moderate, you can even use them in joins as ‘Heaps’, unindexed. Beware, however, since, as the number of rows increase, joins on Table Variable heaps can easily become saddled by very poor execution plans, and this must be cured either by adding constraints (UNIQUE or PRIMARY KEY) or by adding the OPTION (RECOMPILE) hint if this is impossible. Occasionally, the way that the data is distributed prevents the efficient use of Table Variables, and this will require using a temporary table instead. Tables Variables require some awareness by the developer about the potential hazards and how to avoid them. If you are not prepared to do any performance monitoring of your code or fine-tuning, and just want to pummel out stuff that ‘just runs’ without considering namby-pamby stuff such as indexes, then stick to Temporary tables. If you are likely to slosh about large numbers of rows in temporary tables without considering the niceties of processing just what is required and no more, then temporary tables provide a safer and less fragile means-to-an-end for you.

    Read the article

  • Rise Above the Thousands Results

    Choosing among hundreds or thousands of choices would be a challenge especially if you do not have exact preferences on what to choose. If you will put yourself into the shoes of an internet or an online researcher, you will find out that one word or phrase that you enter in the search box field of a search engine and it could provide you hundreds or even thousands of results. And if I am the researcher, I do not think that I would bother to look for those in the sixth or onward pages of results.

    Read the article

  • Interpolating Matrices

    - by sebf
    Hello, Apologies if I am missing something very obvious (likely!) but is there anything wrong with interpolating between two matrices by: float d = (float)(targetTime.Ticks - keyframe_start.ticks) / (float)(keyframe_end.ticks - keyframe_start.ticks); return ((keyframe_start.Transform * (1 - d)) + (keyframe_end.Transform * d)); As in my app, when I try an use this to interpolate between two keyframes, the model begins to 'shrink' - the severity based on how far between the two keyframes the target time is; its worst when the transform split is ~50/50.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Terminology: .NET C++ vs. traditional C++

    - by Mike Clark
    I've recently been working with a team that's using both .NET C++ and pre-.NET C++. I fully understand the technical differences between the two technologies. However, I sometimes feel like I'm floundering when it comes to the terminology used to differentiate the two. Example: Say we have two projects: ProjectA contains "C++" code that builds a .NET assembly DLL. ProjectB contains Visual C++ code that builds a traditional native Windows DLL. What is the best way to succinctly and terminologically draw a distinction between the two projects? Again, I'm not asking for an in-depth technical description of the differences between the two technologies. I'm just looking for names and labels. This is how, today, I might try to make the distinction when talking to someone: "ProjectA is a managed .NET C++ project" and "ProjectB is an unmanaged native C++ DLL project." However I am not at all certain that this terminology is ideal, or even correct. Please describe what you feel the ideal language to use in this situation (or similar situations) might be. Feel free to motivate your answer.

    Read the article

  • The indicator icon of Copy.com disappeared or the menu is unreadable

    - by January
    Copy.com is a commercial service offering free space (much like Dropbox and, once, UbuntuOne). Starting with version 13.10 and continuing with 14.04, two bugs plague the Copy.com application on Ubuntu (see this thread): sometimes, the application indicator is not at all visible even if it is visible, the menu is not readable (no menu entries except for one or two), like this: How can I get rid of these two bugs?

    Read the article

  • With 2 superposed cameras at different depths and switching their culling masks between layers to implement object-selective antialising:

    - by user36845
    We superposed two cameras, one of which uses AA as post-processing effect (AA filtering is cancelled). The camera with the AA effect has depth 0 and the camera with no effect has depth 1 as can be seen in the 5th and 6th Picture. The objects seen on the left are in layer 1 and the ones on the right are in layer 2. We then wrote a script that switches the culling masks of the cameras between the two layers at the push of buttons 1 and 2 respectively, and accomplishes object-selective antialiasing as seen in the first the three pictures. (The way two cameras separately switch culling masks between layers is illustrated in pictures 7,8 & 9.) HOWEVER, after making the environment 3D (see pictures 1-4), by parenting the 2 cameras under First-Person Controller, we started moving around in the environment and stumbled upon a big issue: When we look at the objects from such an angle as in the 4th Picture and we want to apply antialiasing to the first object (object on the left) which stands closer to our cameras now, the culling mask of 1st camera which is at depth 0, has to be switched to that object’s layer while the second object has to be in the culling mask of the 2nd camera at depth 1. And since the two image outputs of two superposed cameras are laid on top of one another; we obtain the erroneous/unrealistic result of the object farther in the back appearing closer to the camera than the front object (see 4th Picture). We already tried switching depths of cameras so that the 1st camera –with AA- now has depth 1 and the second has depth 0; BUT the camera with the AA effect Works in such a way that it applies the AA effect to its full view. So; the camera with the AA effect always has to remain at the lowest depth and the layer of the object to be antialiased has to be then assigned to the culling mask of the AA camera; otherwise all objects in the AA camera’s view (the two cubes in our case) become antialised, which we don’t want. So; how can we resolve this? The pictures are below and in the comments since each post can have 2 pics: Pic 1. No button is pushed: Both objects seem aliased. Pic 2. Button 1 is pushed: Left (1st) object is antialiased. 2nd object remains aliased. Pic 3. Button 2 is pushed: Right (2nd) object is antialiased. 1st object remains aliased. Pic 4. The problematic result in 3D, when using two superposed cameras with different depths Pic 5. Camera 1’s properties can be seen: using AA post-processing and its depth is 0 Pic 6. Camera 2’s properties can be seen: NOT using AA post-processing and its depth is 1 Pic 7. When no button is pushed, both objects are in the culling mask of Camera 2 and are aliased Pic 8. When pushed 1, camera 1 (bottom) shows the 1st object and camera 2 (top) shows the 2nd Pic 9. When pushed 2, camera 1 (bottom) shows the 2nd object and camera 2 (top) shows the 1st

    Read the article

  • How to better adjust more then 2 keyboard layouts

    - by zetah
    From time to time I have to use characters not present in my two layouts: Latin and Cyrillic and instead digging in Character map I thought to additionally add 2 more keyboard layouts. My issue with this approach is that most of the time I use just two layouts, and while changing to different layout (Alt-Shift) I now have to press couple of times to switch to previous layout. It's not just number of pressings, but I have to press two keys at once and track keyboard indicator which is distracting. I tried some options presented in keyboard settings, but I think there is no option that I would like - change just between first two layouts on Alt-Shift, and if I want to use additional layout I can choose it from keyboard indicator drop-down menu. Any ideas how this might be possible

    Read the article

  • Terminology: .NET C++ vs. traditional C++

    - by Mike Clark
    Hello. I've recently been working with a team that's using both .NET C++ and pre-.NET C++. I fully understand the technical differences between the two technologies. However, I sometimes feel like I'm floundering when it comes to the terminology used to differentiate the two. Example: Say we have two projects: ProjectA contains "C++" code that builds a .NET assembly DLL. ProjectB contains Visual C++ code that builds a traditional native Windows DLL. What is the best way to succinctly and terminologically draw a distinction between the two projects? Again, I'm not asking for an in-depth technical description of the differences between the two technologies. I'm just looking for names and labels. This is how I might try to make the distinction when talking to someone about Project A and Project B: "ProjectA is a managed .NET C++ project" and ProjectB is an unmanaged Visual C++ DLL project." However I am not at all certain that this terminology is ideal, or even correct. Please describe what you feel the ideal language to use in this situation (or similar situations) might be. Feel free to motivate your answer.

    Read the article

  • How to position a sprite in a 2D animation skeleton?

    - by Paul Manta
    Given two joints that define a bone, I would like to know how to decide where, between those two joints, I should draw the sprite. This should be a fairly simple thing to solve, but there is one thing that I am not sure about. After I've determined the rotation of the sprite (which is the absolute angle the joints form with the x-axis), I also need to determine the origin point from where I need to start drawing the transformed image. So how should I position the sprite between the two joints? Should I make the center of the image be the midpoint between the two joints, or should I make one the of the joints be the origin? Do these things matter that much (could the wrong positioning make the sprite move oddly during the animation)?

    Read the article

  • Enabling multitouch on an acer 5742?

    - by Ben
    I am trying to get multitouch to work on my touchpad. I am currently trying to run a script to get it to work. It is set to start on boot, saved as .run and has been made executable. here is the code: #!/bin/bash #enable multitouch sleep 10 xinput set-int-prop "SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad" "Two-Finger Scrolling" 8 1 xinput set-int-prop "SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad" "Synaptics Two-Finger Scrolling" 8 1 1 xinput set-int-prop "SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad" "Synaptics Two-Finger Pressure" 32 10 xinput set-int-prop "SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad" "Synaptics Two-Finger Width" 32 8 xinput set-int-prop "SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad" "Synaptics Edge Scrolling" 8 0 0 0 xinput set-int-prop "SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad" "Synaptics Jumpy Cursor Threshold" 32 110 synclient TapButton2=2 exit the commands make multi touch work if I enter them in the terminal, but the script itself does not work. any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Combining Multiple Queries and Parameters into One Operation

    - by shay.shmeltzer
    This question came up twice this week and while the solution is explained in a couple of previous blog entries I did, I thought that showing off the complete solution in a single video would be nice. The scenario is that you have two VOs with queries that are based on a parameter, I showed in the past how to create a parameter form that executes the query - and you can do this for both. But what if you actually need just one value to drive both queries? How do you combine two parameter forms and two buttons into one? This is what this video shows you. The steps are: Creating two parameter forms Setting the value of a parameter in the binding tab Creating a backing bean to execute the code for one button Adding the code to execute another operation Remarking the parts that can be dropped from the screen Check it out here:

    Read the article

  • Duplicate pseudo terminals in linux

    - by bobtheowl2
    On a redhat box [ Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS release 4 (Nahant Update 3) ] Frequently we notice two people being assigned to the same pseudo terminal. For example: $who am i user1 pts/4 Dec 29 08:38 (localhost:13.0) user2 pts/4 Dec 29 09:43 (199.xxx.xxx.xxx) $who -m user1 pts/4 Dec 29 08:38 (localhost:13.0) user2 pts/4 Dec 29 09:43 (199.xxx.xxx.xxx) $whoami user2 This causes problems in a script because "who am i" returns two rows. I know there are differences between the two commands, and obviously we can change the script to fix the problem. But it still bothers me that two users are being returned with the same terminal. We suspect it may be related to dead sessions. Can anyone explain why two (non-unique) pts number are being assigned and/or how that can be prevented in the future?

    Read the article

  • Managed Service Architectures Part I

    - by barryoreilly
    Instead of thinking about service oriented architecture, a concept that is continually defined, redefined, abused and mistreated, perhaps it is time to drop the acronym and consider what we actually need to get the job done.   ‘Pure’ SOA involves the modeling of an organisation’s processes, the so called ‘Top Down’ approach, followed by the implementation of these processes as services.     Another approach, more commonly seen in the wild, is the bottom up approach. This usually involves services that simply start popping up in the organization, and SOA in this case is often just an attempt to rein in these services. Such projects, although described as SOA projects for a variety of reasons, have clearly little relation to process driven architecture. Much has been written about these two approaches, with many deciding that a hybrid of both methods is needed to succeed with SOA.   These hybrid methods are a sensible compromise, but one gets the feeling that there is too much focus on ‘Succeeding with SOA’. Organisations who focus too much on bottom up development, or who waste too much time and money on top down approaches that don’t produce results, are often recommended to attempt an ‘agile’(Erl) or ‘middle-out’ (Microsoft) approach in order to succeed with SOA.  The problem with recommending this approach is that, in most cases, succeeding with SOA isn’t the aim of the project. If a project is started with the simple aim of ‘Succeeding with SOA’ then the reasons for the projects existence probably need to be questioned.   There are a number of things we can be sure of: ·         An organisation will have a number of disparate IT systems ·         Some of these systems will have redundant data and functionality ·         Integration will give considerable ROI ·         Integration will already be under way. ·         Services will already exist in the organisation ·         These services will be inconsistent in their implementation and in their governance   So there are three goals here: 1.       Alignment between the business and IT 2.     Integration of disparate systems 3.     Management of services.   2 and 3 are going to happen,  in fact they must happen if any degree of return is expected from the IT department. Ignoring 1 is considered a typical mistake in SOA implementations, as it ignores the business implications. However, the business implication of this approach is the money saved in more efficient IT processes. 2 and 3 are ongoing, and they will continue happening, even if a large project to produce a SOA metamodel is started. The result will then be an unstructured cackle of services, and a metamodel that is already going out of date. So we get stuck in and rebuild our services so that they match the metamodel, with the far reaching consequences that this will have on all our LOB systems are current. Lets imagine that this actually works ( how often do we rip and replace working software because it doesn't fit a certain pattern? Never -that's the point of integration), we will now be working with a metamodel that is out of date, and most likely incomplete if the organisation is large.      Accepting that an object can have more than one model over time, with perhaps more than one model being  at any given time will help us realise the limitations of the top down model. It is entirely normal , and perhaps necessary, for an organisation to be able to view an entity from different perspectives.   So, instead of trying to constantly force these goals in a straight line, why not let them happen in parallel, and manage the changes in each layer.     If  company A has chosen to model their business processes and create a business architecture, there will be a reason behind this. Often the aim is to make the business more flexible and able to cope with change, through alignment between the business and the IT department.   If company B’s IT department recognizes the problem of wild services springing up everywhere, and decides to do something about it, by designing a platform and processes for the introduction of services, is this not a valid approach?   With the hybrid approach, it is recommended that company A begin deploying services as quickly as possible. Based on models that are clearly incomplete, and which will therefore change rapidly and often in the near future. Natural business evolution will also mean that the models can be guaranteed to change in the not so near future. To ‘Succeed with SOA’ Company B needs to go back to the drawing board and start modeling processes and objects. So, in effect, we are telling business analysts to start developing code based on a model they are unsure of, and telling programmers to ignore the obvious and growing problems in their IT department and start drawing lines and boxes.     Could the problem be that there are two different problem domains? And the whole concept of SOA as it being described by clever salespeople today creates an example of oft dreaded ‘tight coupling’ between these two domains?   Could it be that we have taken two large problem areas, and bundled the solution together in order to create a magic bullet? And then convinced ourselves that the bullet actually exists?   Company A wants to have a closer relationship between the business and its IT department, in order to become a more flexible organization. Company B wants to decrease the maintenance costs of its IT infrastructure. If both companies focus on succeeding with SOA, then they aren’t focusing on their actual goals.   If Company A starts building services from incomplete models, without a gameplan, they will end up in the same situation as company B, with wild services. If company B focuses on modeling, they could easily end up with the same problems as company A.   Now we have two companies, who a short while ago had one problem each, that now have two problems each. This has happened because of a focus on ‘Succeeding with SOA’, rather than solving the problem at hand.   This is not to suggest that the two problem domains are unrelated, a strategy that encompasses both will obviously be good for the organization. But only if the organization realizes this and can develop such a strategy. This strategy cannot be bought in a box.       Anyone who has worked with SOA for a while will be used to analyzing the solutions to a problem and judging the solution’s level of coupling. If we have two applications that each perform separate functions, but need to communicate with each other, we create a integration layer between them, perhaps with a service, but we do all we can to reduce the dependency between the two systems. Using the same approach, we can separate the modeling (business architecture) and the service hosting (technical architecture).     The business architecture describes the processes and business objects in the business domain.   The technical architecture describes the hosting and management and implementation of services.   The glue that binds these together, the integration layer in our analogy, is the service contract, where the operations map the processes to their technical implementation, and the messages map business concepts to software objects in the implementation.   If we reduce the coupling between these layers, we should be able to allow developers to develop services, and business analysts to develop models, without the changes rippling through from one side to the other.   This would allow company A to carry on modeling, and company B to develop a service platform, each achieving their intended goal, without necessarily creating the problems seen in pure top down or bottom up approaches. Company B could then at a later date map their service infrastructure to a unified model, and company A could carry on modeling, insulating deployed services from changes in the ongoing modeling.   How do we do this?  The concept of service virtualization has been around for a while, and is instantly realizable in Microsoft’s Managed Services Engine. Here we can create a layer of virtual services, which represent the business analyst’s view, presenting uniform contracts to the outside world. These services can then transform and route messages to the actual service implementations. I like to think of the virtual services with their beautifully modeled interfaces as ‘SOA services’, and the implementations as simple integration ‘adapter’ services providing an interface to a technical implementation. The Managed Services Engine also provides policy based control over services, regardless of where they are deployed, simplifying handling of security, logging, exception handling etc.   This solves a big problem. The pressure to deliver services quickly is always there in projects. It is very important to quickly show value when implementing service architectures. There is also pressure to deliver quality, and you can’t easily do both at the same time. This approach allows quick delivery with quality increasing over time, allowing modeling and service development to occur in parallel and independent of each other. The link between business modeling and service implementation is not one that is obvious to many organizations, and requires a certain maturity to realize and drive forward. It is also completely possible that a company can benefit from one without the other, even if this approach is frowned upon today, there are many companies doing so and seeing ROI.   Of course there are disadvantages to this. The biggest one being the transformations necessary between the virtual interfaces and the service implementations. Bad choices in developing the services in the service implementation could mean that it is impossible to map the modeled processes to the implementation with redevelopment of the service. In many cases the architect will not have a choice here anyway, as proprietary systems are often delivered with predeveloped services. The alternative is to wait until the model is finished and then build the service according the model. However, if that approach worked we wouldn’t be having this discussion! And even when it does work, natural business evolution will mean that the two concepts (model and implementation) will immediately start to drift away from each other, so coupling them tightly together so that they are forever bound to the model that only applies at the time of the modeling work will not really achieve a great deal. Architecture is all about trade offs, and here a choice has to be made. The choice is between something will initially be of low quality but will work, or something that may well be impossible to achieve in most situations.         In conclusion, top-down is a natural approach for business analysts, and bottom-up  is a natural approach for developers. Instead of trying to force something on both that neither want, and which has not shown itself to be successful,  why not let them get on with their jobs, and let an enterprise architect coordinate the processes?

    Read the article

  • Requesting feedback on my OO design

    - by Prog
    I'm working on an application that creates music by itself. I'm seeking feedback for my OO design so far. This question will focus on one part of the program. The application produces Tune objects, that are the final musical products. Tune is an abstract class with an abstract method play. It has two subclasses: SimpleTune and StructuredTune. SimpleTune owns a Melody and a Progression (chord sequence). It's play implementation plays these two objects simultaneously. StructuredTune owns two Tune instances. It's own play plays the two Tunes one after the other according to a pattern (currently only ABAB). Melody is an abstract class with an abstract play method. It has two subclasses: SimpleMelody and StructuredMelody. SimpleMelody is composed of an array of notes. Invoking play on it plays these notes one after the other. StructuredMelody is composed of an array of Melody objects. Invoking play on it plays these Melodyies one after the other. I think you're starting to see the pattern. Progression is also an abstract class with a play method and two subclasses: SimpleProgression and StructuredProgression, each composed differently and played differently. SimpleProgression owns an array of chords and plays them sequentially. StructuredProgression owns an array of Progressions and it's play implementation plays them sequentially. Every class has a corresponding Generator class. Tune, Melody and Progression are matched with corresponding abstract TuneGenerator, MelodyGenerator and ProgressionGenerator classes, each with an abstract generate method. For example MelodyGenerator defines an abstract Melody generate method. Each of the generators has two subclasses, Simple and Structured. So for example MelodyGenerator has a subclasses SimpleMelodyGenerator, with an implementation of generate that returns a SimpleMelody. (It's important to note that the generate methods encapsulate complex algorithms. They are more than mere factory method. For example SimpleProgressionGenerator.generate() implements an algorithm to compose a series of Chord objects, which are used to instantiate the returned SimpleProgression). Every Structured generator uses another generator internally. It is a Simple generator be default, but in special cases may be a Structured generator. Parts of this design are meant to allow the end-user through the GUI to choose what kind of music is to be created. For example the user can choose between a "simple tune" (SimpleTuneGenerator) and a "full tune" (StructuredTuneGenerator). Other parts of the system aren't subject to direct user-control. What do you think of this design from an OOD perspective? What potential problems do you see with this design? Please share with me your criticism, I'm here to learn. Apart from this, a more specific question: the "every class has a corresponding Generator class" part feels very wrong. However I'm not sure how I could design this differently and achieve the same flexibility. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • MySQL Multi-Aggregated Rows in Crosstab Queries

    MySQL's crosstabs contain aggregate functions on two or more fields, presented in a tabular format. In a multi-aggregate crosstab query, two different functions can be applied to the same field or the same function can be applied to multiple fields on the same (row or column) axis. Rob Gravelle shows you how to apply two different functions to the same field in order to create grouping levels in the row axis.

    Read the article

  • MySQL Multi-Aggregated Rows in Crosstab Queries

    MySQL's crosstabs contain aggregate functions on two or more fields, presented in a tabular format. In a multi-aggregate crosstab query, two different functions can be applied to the same field or the same function can be applied to multiple fields on the same (row or column) axis. Rob Gravelle shows you how to apply two different functions to the same field in order to create grouping levels in the row axis.

    Read the article

  • Install build-essentials in ubuntu 12.04

    - by Mukul Shukla
    After I install a fresh copy of ubuntu and I need to install build-essentials, I have to type: sudo apt-get update and sudo apt-get upgrade before installing build-essentials These two commands take a LOOTTT of time and install many things. Is there a way to install build-essentials without running these two commands, or a way that these two commands don't install all the updates and hence will take less time.

    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 | 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161  | Next Page >