Search Results

Search found 1591 results on 64 pages for 'implementations'.

Page 16/64 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • Cloud to On-Premise Connectivity Patterns

    - by Rajesh Raheja
    Do you have a requirement to convert an Opportunity in Salesforce.com to an Order/Quote in Oracle E-Business Suite? Or maybe you want the creation of an Oracle RightNow Incident to trigger an on-premise Oracle E-Business Suite Service Request creation for RMA and Field Scheduling? If so, read on. In a previous blog post, I discussed integrating TO cloud applications, however the use cases above are the reverse i.e. receiving data FROM cloud applications (SaaS) TO on-premise applications/databases that sit behind a firewall. Oracle SOA Suite is assumed to be on-premise with with Oracle Service Bus as the mediation and virtualization layer. The main considerations for the patterns are are security i.e. shielding enterprise resources; and scalability i.e. minimizing firewall latency. Let me use an analogy to help visualize the patterns: the on-premise system is your home - with your most valuable possessions - and the SaaS app is your favorite on-line store which regularly ships (inbound calls) various types of parcels/items (message types/service operations). You need the items at home (on-premise) but want to safe guard against misguided elements of society (internet threats) who may masquerade as postal workers and vandalize property (denial of service?). Let's look at the patterns. Pattern: Pull from Cloud The on-premise system polls from the SaaS apps and picks up the message instead of having it delivered. This may be done using Oracle RightNow Object Query Language or SOAP APIs. This is particularly suited for certain integration approaches wherein messages are trickling in, can be centralized and batched e.g. retrieving event notifications on an hourly schedule from the Oracle Messaging Service. To compare this pattern with the home analogy, you are avoiding any deliveries to your home and instead go to the post office/UPS/Fedex store to pick up your parcel. Every time. Pros: On-premise assets not exposed to the Internet, firewall issues avoided by only initiating outbound connections Cons: Polling mechanisms may affect performance, may not satisfy near real-time requirements Pattern: Open Firewall Ports The on-premise system exposes the web services that needs to be invoked by the cloud application. This requires opening up firewall ports, routing calls to the appropriate internal services behind the firewall. Fusion Applications uses this pattern, and auto-provisions the services on the various virtual hosts to secure the topology. This works well for service integration, but may not suffice for large volume data integration. Using the home analogy, you have now decided to receive parcels instead of going to the post office every time. A door mail slot cut out allows the postman can drop small parcels, but there is still concern about cutting new holes for larger packages. Pros: optimal pattern for near real-time needs, simpler administration once the service is provisioned Cons: Needs firewall ports to be opened up for new services, may not suffice for batch integration requiring direct database access Pattern: Virtual Private Networking The on-premise network is "extended" to the cloud (or an intermediary on-demand / managed service offering) using Virtual Private Networking (VPN) so that messages are delivered to the on-premise system in a trusted channel. Using the home analogy, you entrust a set of keys with a neighbor or property manager who receives the packages, and then drops it inside your home. Pros: Individual firewall ports don't need to be opened, more suited for high scalability needs, can support large volume data integration, easier management of one connection vs a multitude of open ports Cons: VPN setup, specific hardware support, requires cloud provider to support virtual private computing Pattern: Reverse Proxy / API Gateway The on-premise system uses a reverse proxy "API gateway" software on the DMZ to receive messages. The reverse proxy can be implemented using various mechanisms e.g. Oracle API Gateway provides firewall and proxy services along with comprehensive security, auditing, throttling benefits. If a firewall already exists, then Oracle Service Bus or Oracle HTTP Server virtual hosts can provide reverse proxy implementations on the DMZ. Custom built implementations are also possible if specific functionality (such as message store-n-forward) is needed. In the home analogy, this pattern sits in between cutting mail slots and handing over keys. Instead, you install (and maintain) a mailbox in your home premises outside your door. The post office delivers the parcels in your mailbox, from where you can securely retrieve it. Pros: Very secure, very flexible Cons: Introduces a new software component, needs DMZ deployment and management Pattern: On-Premise Agent (Tunneling) A light weight "agent" software sits behind the firewall and initiates the communication with the cloud, thereby avoiding firewall issues. It then maintains a bi-directional connection either with pull or push based approaches using (or abusing, depending on your viewpoint) the HTTP protocol. Programming protocols such as Comet, WebSockets, HTTP CONNECT, HTTP SSH Tunneling etc. are possible implementation options. In the home analogy, a resident receives the parcel from the postal worker by opening the door, however you still take precautions with chain locks and package inspections. Pros: Light weight software, IT doesn't need to setup anything Cons: May bypass critical firewall checks e.g. virus scans, separate software download, proliferation of non-IT managed software Conclusion The patterns above are some of the most commonly encountered ones for cloud to on-premise integration. Selecting the right pattern for your project involves looking at your scalability needs, security restrictions, sync vs asynchronous implementation, near real-time vs batch expectations, cloud provider capabilities, budget, and more. In some cases, the basic "Pull from Cloud" may be acceptable, whereas in others, an extensive VPN topology may be well justified. For more details on the Oracle cloud integration strategy, download this white paper.

    Read the article

  • OSB, Service Callouts and OQL - Part 1

    - by Sabha
    Oracle Fusion Middleware customers use Oracle Service Bus (OSB) for virtualizing Service endpoints and implementing stateless service orchestrations. Behind the performance and speed of OSB, there are a couple of key design implementations that can affect application performance and behavior under heavy load. One of the heavily used feature in OSB is the Service Callout pipeline action for message enrichment and invoking multiple services as part of one single orchestration. Overuse of this feature, without understanding its internal implementation, can lead to serious problems. This post will delve into OSB internals, the problem associated with usage of Service Callout under high loads, diagnosing it via thread dump and heap dump analysis using tools like ThreadLogic and OQL (Object Query Language) and resolving it. The first section in the series will mainly cover the threading model used internally by OSB for implementing Route Vs. Service Callouts. Please refer to the blog post for more details. 

    Read the article

  • What is the situation about OpenGL under Ubuntu Unity and Gnome3?

    - by user827992
    In a GNU/linux distribution is usually installed Xorg as main graphical server, it operates with a client-server logic, a special windows is designate as desktop environment and this special windows can handle all the eyecandy stuff like decorations, icons and effects. The problem is that the latest UI heavily relies on hardware acceleration, Unity is an overlay on Compiz and the Gnome-shell also require an active driver for the GPU to work well: the problem is: on the same OS I can find multiple implementations of OpenGL who is handling my OpenGL buffer? how the OpenGL buffer is managed compared to the other windows? how can I be sure that my OpenGL implementation is glued to the hardware and is not related to the client-server logic of Xorg? For example I have tried the clutter library and I have only experienced problems under both Unity and GTK/Gnome, no problem under other OS.

    Read the article

  • Suggestions for Future or On-The-Edge Languages (2011)

    - by Kurtis
    I'm just looking for some suggestions on newer languages and language implementations that are useful for string manipulation. It's now 2011 and a lot has changed over the years. Most of my work includes web development (which is mostly text-based) and command line scripting. I'm pretty language agnostic, although I've felt violated using PHP over the years. My only requirements are that the language be good at text manipulation, without a lot of 3rd party libraries (core libraries are okay, though), and that the language and/or standard implementation is very up to date or even "futuristic". For example, the two main languages I'm looking at right now are Python (Version 3.x) or Perl (Version 6.x). Research, Academic, and Experimental languages are okay with me. I don't mind functional languages although I'd like to have the option of programming in a procedural or even object oriented manner. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • SSIS 2008 Configuration Settings Handling Logic for Variables Visualized

    - by Compudicted
    There are many articles discussing the specifics of how the configuration settings are applied including the differences between SSIS 2005 and 2008 version implementations, however this topic keeps resurfacing on MSDN’s SSIS Forum. I thought it could be useful to cover the logic aspect visually. Below is a diagram explaining the basic flow of a variable setting for a case when no parent package is involved.   As you can see the run time stage ignores any command line flags for variables already set in the config file, I realize this is not stressed enough in many publications. Besides, another interesting fact is that the command line dtexec tool is case sensitive for the portion following the package keyword, I mean if you specify your flag to set a new value for a variable like dtexec /f Package.dtsx -set \package.variables[varPkgMyDate].value;02/01/2011 (notice the lover case v in .value) You will get errors. By capitalizing the keyword the package runs successfully.

    Read the article

  • initial Class design: access modifiers and no-arg constructors

    - by yas
    Context: Student working through Class design in personal/side project for Summer. I've never written anything implemented by others or had to maintain code. Trying to maximize encapsulation and imagining what would make code easy to maintain. Concept: Tight/Loose Class design where Tight and Loose refer to access modifiers and constructors. Tight: initially, everything, including setters, is private and a no-arg constructor is not provided (only a full constructor). Loose: not Tight Exceptions: the obvious like toString Reasoning: If code, at the very beginning, is tight, then it should be guaranteed that changes, with respect to access/creation, should never damage existing implementations. The loosening of code happens incrementally and must be thought through, justified, and safe (validated). Benefit: Existing implementing code should not break if changes are made later. Cost: Takes more time to create. Since this is my own thinking, I hope to get feedback as to whether I should push to work this way. Good idea or bad idea?

    Read the article

  • Build in better usability with UX Direct

    - by JuergenKress
    The Oracle Applications User Experience team has created a program called Oracle UX Direct to provide customers, partners, and consultants in the enterprise industry with design best-practices and tools that they can leverage to make their enterprise implementations more successful. Read the Voice of User Experience, or VoX, blog to learn more about why the program was created, and visit the UX Direct web site to find out how to introduce design thinking during the implementation stage. Create a solution that best fits the needs of users from the beginning. Read more about UX Direct on VoX. SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Wiki Mix Forum Technorati Tags: UX,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • Microsoft premier éditeur à publier ses spécifications JavaScript~ JScript 5.7 et 5.8, ses implément

    Microsoft premier éditeur à publier ses spécifications JavaScript JScript 5.7 et 5.8, les implémentations de JavaScript pour Internet Explorer 7 et 8 Microsoft vient de publier les spécifications de JScript : JScript 5.7 pour Internet Explorer 7 et JScript 5.8 pour Internet Explorer 8. Pour mémoire JScript est l'implémentation maison de JavaScript utilisé par Redmond dans ses navigateurs. JavaScript suit les standards de la spécification ECMA-262 (ou ECMAScript) dont le but est d'uniformiser, autant que faire se peut, le cadre de travail des développeurs web. D'où le nom des deux documents récemment publiés sur MSDN : "Internet Explorer ECMA-262 ECMAScript Language ...

    Read the article

  • OpenJDK In The News: Oracle Outlines Roadmap for Java SE and JavaFX at JavaOne 2012

    - by $utils.escapeXML($entry.author)
    The OpenJDK Community continues to host the development of the reference implementation of Java SE 8. Weekly developer preview builds of JDK 8 continue to be available from jdk8.java.net.OpenJDK continues to thrive with contributions from Oracle, as well as other companies, researchers and individuals.The OpenJDK Web Site Terms of Use was recently updated to allow work on Java Specification Requests (JSRs) for Java SE to take place in the OpenJDK Community, alongside their corresponding reference implementations, so that specification leads can satisfy the new transparency requirements of the Java Community Process (JCP 2.8).“The recent decision by the Java SE 8 Expert Group to defer modularity to Java SE 9 will allow us to focus on the highly-anticipated Project Lambda, the Nashorn JavaScript engine, the new Date/Time API, and Type Annotations, along with numerous other performance, simplification, and usability enhancements,” said Georges Saab, vice president, Software Development, Java Platform Group at Oracle. “We are continuing to increase our communication and transparency by developing the reference implementation and the Oracle-led JSRs in the OpenJDK community.”Quotes taken from the 14th press release from Oracle mentioning OpenJDK, titled "Oracle Outlines Roadmap for Java SE and JavaFX at JavaOne 2012".

    Read the article

  • SAP NetWeaver Cloud Java EE 6 Web Profile Certified!

    - by reza_rahman
    We are very pleased to welcome SAP NetWeaver Cloud to the Java EE 6 family! SAP successfully certified NetWeaver Cloud SDK-2.x.Beta against the Java EE 6 Web Profile TCK. This brings the number of Web Profile implementations to no less than seven and the total number of certified platforms on the official Java EE compatibility page to eighteen. Other Java EE 6 Web Profile platforms include the likes of GlassFish, JBoss AS, Resin and Apache TomEE. Under the hood, SAP NetWeaver Cloud uses EclipseLink, Tomcat and OpenEJB. The NetWeaver team encourages you to try it out and send them feedback. More details here.

    Read the article

  • Chargeback and billing across public and private clouds

    - by llaszews
    Had a great conversation today regarding the need for metering, chargeback, and billing of cloud computing resources. The person I spoken with at a Fortune 1000 company increased the scope and magnitude of the issue of billing for cloud computing resources beyond what I had previously considered. I believed that doing any type of chargeback and billing for one public, private or hybrid installation was difficult. This person pointed out that the problem is even bigger in scope. The reality is many companies are using multiple public cloud vendors and have many different private cloud data centers. A customer may use AWS for some smaller public cloud applications, Salesforce.com (SaaS), Rackspace for IaaS, Savvis for colocation and a variety of Iaas and PaaS implementations for the private cloud. How does a company get a consolidated bill for all these different cloud environments? I am not sure their is an answer right now.

    Read the article

  • When should an API favour optimization over readability and ease-of-use?

    - by jmlane
    I am in the process of designing a small library, where one of my design goals is to use as much of the native domain language as possible in the API. While doing so, I've noticed that there are some cases in the API outline where a more intuitive, readable attribute/method call requires some functionally unnecessary encapsulation. Since the final product will not necessarily require high performance, I am unconcerned about making the decision to favour ease-of-use in my current project over the most efficient implementation of the code in question. I know not to assume readability and ease-of-use are paramount in all expected use-cases, such as when performance is required. I would like to know if there are more general reasons that argue for an API design preferring (marginally) more efficient implementations?

    Read the article

  • Are there similarities between operating system kernels and programming language kernels?

    - by rahmu
    I know very little about Smalltalk but I noticed that there's a frequent mention of the "kernel". Dan Ingalls prime maintainer of several implementations of Smalltalk also worked on a Javascript environment called "Lively Kernel" and in Peter Siebel's book he kept mentionning the "kernel". I cannot help but think that it is no coincidence that the creators of Smalltalk used the name of a (central) part of operating systems to refer to a particular component of their language. Was it because Smalltalk intended to act as an operating system? Was it because theory behind programming languages and operating systems have a lot in common? What is the reason behind the common appelation of the two components?

    Read the article

  • Implement Fast Inverse Square Root in Javascript?

    - by BBz
    The Fast Inverse Square Root from Quake III seems to use a floating-point trick. As I understand, floating-point representation can have some different implementations. So is it possible to implement the Fast Inverse Square Root in Javascript? Would it return the same result? float Q_rsqrt(float number) { long i; float x2, y; const float threehalfs = 1.5F; x2 = number * 0.5F; y = number; i = * ( long * ) &y; i = 0x5f3759df - ( i >> 1 ); y = * ( float * ) &i; y = y * ( threehalfs - ( x2 * y * y ) ); return y; }

    Read the article

  • Can i use aac in an commercial app for free?

    - by Jason123
    I was wondering if i can use the aac codec in my commercial app for free (through lgpl ffmpeg). It says on the wiki: No licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format.[36] This reason alone makes AAC a much more attractive format to distribute content than MP3, particularly for streaming content (such as Internet radio). However, a patent license is required for all manufacturers or developers of AAC codecs. For this reason free and open source software implementations such as FFmpeg and FAAC may be distributed in source form only, in order to avoid patent infringement. (See below under Products that support AAC, Software.) But the xSplit program had to cancel the AAC for free members because they have to pay royalties per person. Is this true (that you have to pay per each person that uses aac)? If you do have to pay, which company do you pay to and how does one apply?

    Read the article

  • Security Alert for CVE-2011-5035 Updated

    - by Eric P. Maurice
    Hi, this is Eric Maurice again.  Oracle has just updated the Security Alert for CVE-2011-5035 to announce the availability of additional fixes for products that were affected by this vulnerability through their use of the WebLogic Server and Oracle Container for J2EE components.  As explained in a previous blog entry, a number of programming language implementations and web servers were found vulnerable to hash table collision attacks.  This vulnerability is typically remotely exploitable without authentication, i.e., it may be exploited over a network without the need for a username and password.  If successfully exploited, malicious attackers can use this vulnerability to create denial of service conditions against the targeted system. A complete list of affected products and their versions, as well as instructions on how to obtain the fixes, are listed on the Security Alert Advisory.  Oracle highly recommends that customers apply these fixes as soon as possible.

    Read the article

  • Develop JavaScript API to expose web services [closed]

    - by Apps
    We are planning to develop a JavaScript API to expose some of our J2EE based services. We are doing this keeping Google Maps API in mind. Can someone please suggested where we should start and the approaches that we need to follow to create a useful and extensible JavaScript API? These are the things that we are considering to achieve. It should be very simple for others to use our API. We feel Google Maps API is like that. We should be able to release the updates of the APIs without affecting the existing implementations. We should have enough security measures so that not all can use these services. Please suggest us if there are any books that can guide us through. Any suggestion will be greatly helpful for us. Please let me know if my question is not clear or you need any further information.

    Read the article

  • Earliest use of Comments as Semantically Meaningful Things in a Program?

    - by Alan Storm
    In certain corners of the PHP meta-programming world, it's become fashionable to use PHPDoc comments as a mechanism for providing semantically meaningful information to a program. That is, other code will parse the doc blocks and do something significant with the information encoded in those comments. Doctrine's annotations and code generation are an example of this. What's the earliest (or some early) use of this technique? I have vague memories of some early java Design by Contract implementations doing similar things, but I'm not sure of those folks were inventing the technique, or if they got it from somewhere. Mainly asking so I can provide some historical context for PHP developers who haven't come across the technique before, and are distrustful of it because it seems a little crazy pants.

    Read the article

  • Concurrency Utilities for Java EE Early Draft (JSR 236)

    - by arungupta
    Concurrency Utilities for Java EE is being worked as JSR 236 and has released an Early Draft. It provides concurrency capabilities to Java EE application components without compromising container integrity. Simple (common) and advanced concurrency patterns are easily supported without sacrificing usability. Using Java SE concurrency utilities such as java.util.concurrent API, java.lang.Thread and java.util.Timer in a Java EE application component such as EJB or Servlet are problematic since the container and server have no knowledge of these resources. JSR 236 enables concurrency largely by extending the Concurrency Utilities API developed under JSR-166. This also allows a consistency between Java SE and Java EE concurrency programming model. There are four main programming interfaces available: ManagedExecutorService ManagedScheduledExecutorService ContextService ManagedThreadFactory ManagedExecutorService is a managed version of java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService. The implementations of this interface are provided by the container and accessible using JNDI reference: <resource-env-ref>  <resource-env-ref-name>    concurrent/BatchExecutor  </resource-env-ref-name>  <resource-env-ref-type>    javax.enterprise.concurrent.ManagedExecutorService  </resource-env-ref-type><resource-env-ref> and available as: @Resource(name="concurrent/BatchExecutor")ManagedExecutorService executor; Its recommended to bind the JNDI references in the java:comp/env/concurrent subcontext. The asynchronous tasks that need to be executed need to implement java.lang.Runnable or java.util.concurrent.Callable interface as: public class MyTask implements Runnable { public void run() { // business logic goes here }} OR public class MyTask2 implements Callable<Date> {  public Date call() { // business logic goes here   }} The task is then submitted to the executor using one of the submit method that return a Future instance. The Future represents the result of the task and can also be used to check if the task is complete or wait for its completion. Future<String> future = executor.submit(new MyTask(), String.class);. . .String result = future.get(); Another example to submit tasks is: class MyTask implements Callback<Long> { . . . }class MyTask2 implements Callback<Date> { . . . }ArrayList<Callable> tasks = new ArrayList<();tasks.add(new MyTask());tasks.add(new MyTask2());List<Future<Object>> result = executor.invokeAll(tasks); The ManagedExecutorService may be configured for different properties such as: Hung Task Threshold: Time in milliseconds that a task can execute before it is considered hung Pool Info Core Size: Number of threads to keep alive Maximum Size: Maximum number of threads allowed in the pool Keep Alive: Time to allow threads to remain idle when # of threads > Core Size Work Queue Capacity: # of tasks that can be stored in inbound buffer Thread Use: Application intend to run short vs long-running tasks, accordingly pooled or daemon threads are picked ManagedScheduledExecutorService adds delay and periodic task running capabilities to ManagedExecutorService. The implementations of this interface are provided by the container and accessible using JNDI reference: <resource-env-ref>  <resource-env-ref-name>    concurrent/BatchExecutor  </resource-env-ref-name>  <resource-env-ref-type>    javax.enterprise.concurrent.ManagedExecutorService  </resource-env-ref-type><resource-env-ref> and available as: @Resource(name="concurrent/timedExecutor")ManagedExecutorService executor; And then the tasks are submitted using submit, invokeXXX or scheduleXXX methods. ScheduledFuture<?> future = executor.schedule(new MyTask(), 5, TimeUnit.SECONDS); This will create and execute a one-shot action that becomes enabled after 5 seconds of delay. More control is possible using one of the newly added methods: MyTaskListener implements ManagedTaskListener {  public void taskStarting(...) { . . . }  public void taskSubmitted(...) { . . . }  public void taskDone(...) { . . . }  public void taskAborted(...) { . . . } }ScheduledFuture<?> future = executor.schedule(new MyTask(), 5, TimeUnit.SECONDS, new MyTaskListener()); Here, ManagedTaskListener is used to monitor the state of a task's future. ManagedThreadFactory provides a method for creating threads for execution in a managed environment. A simple usage is: @Resource(name="concurrent/myThreadFactory")ManagedThreadFactory factory;. . .Thread thread = factory.newThread(new Runnable() { . . . }); concurrent/myThreadFactory is a JNDI resource. There is lot of interesting content in the Early Draft, download it, and read yourself. The implementation will be made available soon and also be integrated in GlassFish 4 as well. Some references for further exploring ... Javadoc Early Draft Specification concurrency-ee-spec.java.net [email protected]

    Read the article

  • Blueprints API for Oracle NoSQL Database

    - by Charles Lamb
    Here's an implementation of the Blueprints API for Oracle NoSQL Database. https://github.com/dwmclary/blueprints-oracle-nosqldb Blueprints is a collection of interfaces, implementations, ouplementations, and test suites for the property graph data model. Blueprints is analogous to the JDBC, but for graph databases. As such, it provides a common set of interfaces to allow developers to plug-and-play their graph database backend. Moreover, software written atop Blueprints works over all Blueprints-enabled graph databases. Within the TinkerPop software stack, Blueprints serves as the foundational technology for: Pipes: A lazy, data flow framework Gremlin: A graph traversal language Frames: An object-to-graph mapper Furnace: A graph algorithms package Rexster: A graph server

    Read the article

  • Product Value Chain Management: How Oracle is Taking the Lead on Next Generation Enterprise PLM

    To manage growing product complexity and innovation challenges, Product Lifecycle Management solutions have become staple IT investments over the years. But as product information continues to span more and more functions inside the company and out, we've seen many customer PLM implementations adapt and expand to serve new needs in a fully connected world. We call this next level of PLM the Product Value Chain, an integrated business model that offers powerful new strategies for executives to collectively leverage PLM other industry leading Oracle applications to achieve further incremental value. In this Appcast, hear Terri Hiskey, Director PLM Product Marketing, and John Kelley, VP PLM Product Strategy, discuss Oracle's vision for next generation enterprise PLM: the Product Value Chain.

    Read the article

  • When should code favour optimization over readability and ease-of-use?

    - by jmlane
    I am in the process of designing a small library, where one of my design goals is that the API should be as close to the domain language as possible. While working on the design, I've noticed that there are some cases in the code where a more intuitive, readable attribute/method call requires some functionally unnecessary encapsulation. Since the final product will not necessarily require high performance, I am unconcerned about making the decision to favour ease-of-use in my current project over the most efficient implementation of the code in question. I know not to assume readability and ease-of-use are paramount in all expected use-cases, such as when performance is required. I would like to know if there are more general reasons that argue for a design preferring more efficient implementations—even if only marginally so?

    Read the article

  • Maximizing the Value of Oracle Applications using Oracle Fusion Middleware

    Hear about the latest strategies for maximizing the value of your Oracle Applications using technologies in Oracle Fusion Middleware. Today's businesses recognize that to be more innovative with their business applications, they need to shorten their application implementations, eliminate brittle integrations and develop a simpler approach to securing and managing their applications. In this podcast we'll hear techniques for extending the reach of applications through improved user experience and collaboration, create application extensions that minimize the risk during upgrades, and make more informed decisions with integrated business intelligence. These approaches applied with Oracle Fusion Middleware and Oracle Applications can help lower TCO and provide rapid returns for your business.

    Read the article

  • Implementing a Custom Coherence PartitionAssignmentStrategy

    - by jpurdy
    A recent A-Team engagement required the development of a custom PartitionAssignmentStrategy (PAS). By way of background, a PAS is an implementation of a Java interface that controls how a Coherence partitioned cache service assigns partitions (primary and backup copies) across the available set of storage-enabled members. While seemingly straightforward, this is actually a very difficult problem to solve. Traditionally, Coherence used a distributed algorithm spread across the cache servers (and as of Coherence 3.7, this is still the default implementation). With the introduction of the PAS interface, the model of operation was changed so that the logic would run solely in the cache service senior member. Obviously, this makes the development of a custom PAS vastly less complex, and in practice does not introduce a significant single point of failure/bottleneck. Note that Coherence ships with a default PAS implementation but it is not used by default. Further, custom PAS implementations are uncommon (this engagement was the first custom implementation that we know of). The particular implementation mentioned above also faced challenges related to managing multiple backup copies but that won't be discussed here. There were a few challenges that arose during design and implementation: Naive algorithms had an unreasonable upper bound of computational cost. There was significant complexity associated with configurations where the member count varied significantly between physical machines. Most of the complexity of a PAS is related to rebalancing, not initial assignment (which is usually fairly simple). A custom PAS may need to solve several problems simultaneously, such as: Ensuring that each member has a similar number of primary and backup partitions (e.g. each member has the same number of primary and backup partitions) Ensuring that each member carries similar responsibility (e.g. the most heavily loaded member has no more than one partition more than the least loaded). Ensuring that each partition is on the same member as a corresponding local resource (e.g. for applications that use partitioning across message queues, to ensure that each partition is collocated with its corresponding message queue). Ensuring that a given member holds no more than a given number of partitions (e.g. no member has more than 10 partitions) Ensuring that backups are placed far enough away from the primaries (e.g. on a different physical machine or a different blade enclosure) Achieving the above goals while ensuring that partition movement is minimized. These objectives can be even more complicated when the topology of the cluster is irregular. For example, if multiple cluster members may exist on each physical machine, then clearly the possibility exists that at certain points (e.g. following a member failure), the number of members on each machine may vary, in certain cases significantly so. Consider the case where there are three physical machines, with 3, 3 and 9 members each (respectively). This introduces complexity since the backups for the 9 members on the the largest machine must be spread across the other 6 members (to ensure placement on different physical machines), preventing an even distribution. For any given problem like this, there are usually reasonable compromises available, but the key point is that objectives may conflict under extreme (but not at all unlikely) circumstances. The most obvious general purpose partition assignment algorithm (possibly the only general purpose one) is to define a scoring function for a given mapping of partitions to members, and then apply that function to each possible permutation, selecting the most optimal permutation. This would result in N! (factorial) evaluations of the scoring function. This is clearly impractical for all but the smallest values of N (e.g. a partition count in the single digits). It's difficult to prove that more efficient general purpose algorithms don't exist, but the key take away from this is that algorithms will tend to either have exorbitant worst case performance or may fail to find optimal solutions (or both) -- it is very important to be able to show that worst case performance is acceptable. This quickly leads to the conclusion that the problem must be further constrained, perhaps by limiting functionality or by using domain-specific optimizations. Unfortunately, it can be very difficult to design these more focused algorithms. In the specific case mentioned, we constrained the solution space to very small clusters (in terms of machine count) with small partition counts and supported exactly two backup copies, and accepted the fact that partition movement could potentially be significant (preferring to solve that issue through brute force). We then used the out-of-the-box PAS implementation as a fallback, delegating to it for configurations that were not supported by our algorithm. Our experience was that the PAS interface is quite usable, but there are intrinsic challenges to designing PAS implementations that should be very carefully evaluated before committing to that approach.

    Read the article

  • Share buttons vs sharer urls

    - by TeeOh
    As some people might know, adding share buttons from Facebook and Twitter can cause a page to slow down. I've seen many sites pass on the common iframe implementations that these sites offer and simply create icons that link to a sharer url for better control of page performance. http://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F&t=CNN%26s+website%27 However, I've also read that Facebook is dropping support for these links. For example, this link now redirects to the Like Button. http://www.facebook.com/facebook-widgets/share.php Here is an article noting that Facebook is deprecating/has deprecated it's share functionality and is sticking with the Like button. http://www.barbariangroup.com/posts/7544-the_facebook_share_button_has_been_deprecated_called_it I'm assuming this is the same for the sharing url. If the sharer url is no longer a reliable option, what other methods are there besides using 3rd party widgets (like Addthis)?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >