Search Results

Search found 9436 results on 378 pages for 'component architecture'.

Page 17/378 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • Determine target architecture of binary file in Linux (library or executable)

    - by Fernando Miguélez
    We have an issue related to a Java application running under a (rather old) FC3 on a Advantech POS board with a Via C3 processor. The java application has several compiled shared libs that are accessed via JNI. Via C3 processor is suppossed to be i686 compatible. Some time ago after installing Ubuntu 6.10 on a MiniItx board with the same processor I found out that the previous statement is not 100% true. The Ubuntu kernel hanged on startup due to the lack of some specific and optional instructions of the i686 set in the C3 processor. These instructions missing in C3 implementation of i686 set are used by default by GCC compiler when using i686 optimizations. The solution in this case was to go with a i386 compiled version of Ubuntu distribution. The base problem with the Java application is that the FC3 distribution was installed on the HD by cloning from an image of the HD of another PC, this time an Intel P4. Afterwards the distribution needed some hacking to have it running such as replacing some packages (such as the kernel one) with the i383 compiled version. The problem is that after working for a while the system completely hangs without a trace. I am afraid that some i686 code is left somewhere in the system and could be executed randomly at any time (for example after recovering from suspend mode or something like that). My question is: Is there any tool or way to find out at what specific architecture is an binary file (executable or library) aimed provided that "file" does not give so much information?

    Read the article

  • Importing data from third party datasource (open architecture design )

    - by mare
    How would you design an application (classes, interfaces in class library) in .NET when we have a fixed database design on our side and we need to support imports of data from third party data sources, which will most likely be in XML? For instance, let us say we have a Products table in our DB which has columns Id Title Description TaxLevel Price and on the other side we have for instance Products: ProductId ProdTitle Text BasicPrice Quantity. Currently I do it like this: Have the third party XML convert to classes and XSD's and then deserialize its contents into strong typed objects (what we get as a result of this process is classes like ThirdPartyProduct, ThirdPartyClassification, etc.). Then I have methods like this: InsertProduct(ThirdPartyProduct newproduct) I do not use interfaces at the moment but I would like them to. What I would like is implement something like public class Contoso_ProductSynchronization : ProductSynchronization InsertProduct(ContosoProduct p) where ProductSynchronization will be an interface or abstract class. There will most likely be many implementations of ProductSynchronization. I cannot hardcode the types - classes like ContosoProduct, NorthwindProduct might be created from the third party XML's (so preferably I would continue to use deserialization). Hopefully someone will understand what I'm trying to explain here. Just imagine you are the seller and you have numerous providers and each one uses their own proprietary XML format. I don't mind the development, which will of course be needed everytime new format appears, because it will only require 10-20 methods to be implemented, I just want the architecture to be open and support that.

    Read the article

  • What pattern is layered architecture in asp.net ?

    - by haansi
    Hi, I am a asp.net developer and don't know much about patterns and architecture. I will very thankful if you can please guide me here. In my web applications I use 4 layers. Web site project (having web forms + code behind cs files, user controls + code behind cs files, master pages + code behind cs files) CustomTypesLayer a class library (having custom types, enumerations, DTOs, constructers, get, set and validations) BusinessLogicLayer a class library (having all business logic, rules and all calls to DAL functions) DataAccessLayer a class library( having just classes communicating to database.) -My user interface just calls BusinessLogicLayer. BusinessLogicLayer do proecessign in it self and for data it calls DataAccessLayer funtions. -Web forms do not calls directly DAL. -CustomTypesLayer is shared by all layers. Please guide me is this approach a pattern ? I though it may be MVC or MVP but pages have there code behind files as well which are confusing me. If it is no patren is it near to some patren ? pleaes guide thanks

    Read the article

  • Entity and N-Tier architecture in C#

    - by acadia
    Hello, I have three tables as shown below Emp ---- empID int empName deptID empDetails ----------- empDetailsID int empID int empDocuments -------------- docID empID docName docType I am creating a entity class so that I can use n-tier architecture to do database transactions etc in C#. I started creating class for the same as shown below using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace employee { class emp { private int empID; private string empName; private int deptID; public int EmpID { get; set; } public string EmpName { get; set; } public int deptID { get; set; } } } My question is as empDetails and empDocuments are related to emp by empID. How do I have those in my emp class. I would appreciate if you can direct me to an example. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Pitfalls of the Architecture - Database based HTTP Request/Response Parsing

    - by Sam
    We have a current eCommerce Site that runs on ASP.NET and we hired a consultant to develop an new site bases on SOA. The new site architecture is as follows Web Application : Single Page Web Application (built on javascript/jquery templates - do not use any MVVM frameworks) that uses some javascript thrown all over the place. Service Layer : Very very light Service Layer that does not do anything other than calling a single stored procedure and pass in the entire http request. Database : The entire site content is in the database. The database does the heavy lifting of parsing the request and based on the HTTP method and some input parameter calls the appropriate Store Procedures or views and renders the result in JSON/XML. We have been told by them that this is built on latest and greatest technologies. I have a lot of concerns and of them given are the few Load on the Database SEO concerns for single page application as this is a public facing website Scalablity? Is this SOA? Cross Browser compatability (Site does not work in < IE9) Realistic implementaion of Single page application I know something is not right but I just need to validate my concerns here. Please help me.

    Read the article

  • SSIS Lookup component tuning tips

    - by jamiet
    Yesterday evening I attended a London meeting of the UK SQL Server User Group at Microsoft’s offices in London Victoria. As usual it was both a fun and informative evening and in particular there seemed to be a few questions arising about tuning the SSIS Lookup component; I rattled off some comments and figured it would be prudent to drop some of them into a dedicated blog post, hence the one you are reading right now. Scene setting A popular pattern in SSIS is to use a Lookup component to determine whether a record in the pipeline already exists in the intended destination table or not and I cover this pattern in my 2006 blog post Checking if a row exists and if it does, has it changed? (note to self: must rewrite that blog post for SSIS2008). Fundamentally the SSIS lookup component (when using FullCache option) sucks some data out of a database and holds it in memory so that it can be compared to data in the pipeline. One of the big benefits of using SSIS dataflows is that they process data one buffer at a time; that means that not all of the data from your source exists in the dataflow at the same time and is why a SSIS dataflow can process data volumes that far exceed the available memory. However, that only applies to data in the pipeline; for reasons that are hopefully obvious ALL of the data in the lookup set must exist in the memory cache for the duration of the dataflow’s execution which means that any memory used by the lookup cache will not be available to be used as a pipeline buffer. Moreover, there’s an obvious correlation between the amount of data in the lookup cache and the time it takes to charge that cache; the more data you have then the longer it will take to charge and the longer you have to wait until the dataflow actually starts to do anything. For these reasons your goal is simple: ensure that the lookup cache contains as little data as possible. General tips Here is a simple tick list you can follow in order to tune your lookups: Use a SQL statement to charge your cache, don’t just pick a table from the dropdown list made available to you. (Read why in SELECT *... or select from a dropdown in an OLE DB Source component?) Only pick the columns that you need, ignore everything else Make the database columns that your cache is populated from as narrow as possible. If a column is defined as VARCHAR(20) then SSIS will allocate 20 bytes for every value in that column – that is a big waste if the actual values are significantly less than 20 characters in length. Do you need DT_WSTR typed columns or will DT_STR suffice? DT_WSTR uses twice the amount of space to hold values that can be stored using a DT_STR so if you can use DT_STR, consider doing so. Same principle goes for the numerical datatypes DT_I2/DT_I4/DT_I8. Only populate the cache with data that you KNOW you will need. In other words, think about your WHERE clause! Thinking outside the box It is tempting to build a large monolithic dataflow that does many things, one of which is a Lookup. Often though you can make better use of your available resources by, well, mixing things up a little and here are a few ideas to get your creative juices flowing: There is no rule that says everything has to happen in a single dataflow. If you have some particularly resource intensive lookups then consider putting that lookup into a dataflow all of its own and using raw files to pass the pipeline data in and out of that dataflow. Know your data. If you think, for example, that the majority of your incoming rows will match with only a small subset of your lookup data then consider chaining multiple lookup components together; the first would use a FullCache containing that data subset and the remaining data that doesn’t find a match could be passed to a second lookup that perhaps uses a NoCache lookup thus negating the need to pull all of that least-used lookup data into memory. Do you need to process all of your incoming data all at once? If you can process different partitions of your data separately then you can partition your lookup cache as well. For example, if you are using a lookup to convert a location into a [LocationId] then why not process your data one region at a time? This will mean your lookup cache only has to contain data for the location that you are currently processing and with the ability of the Lookup in SSIS2008 and beyond to charge the cache using a dynamically built SQL statement you’ll be able to achieve it using the same dataflow and simply loop over it using a ForEach loop. Taking the previous data partitioning idea further … a dataflow can contain more than one data path so why not split your data using a conditional split component and, again, charge your lookup caches with only the data that they need for that partition. Lookups have two uses: to (1) find a matching row from the lookup set and (2) put attributes from that matching row into the pipeline. Ask yourself, do you need to do these two things at the same time? After all once you have the key column(s) from your lookup set then you can use that key to get the rest of attributes further downstream, perhaps even in another dataflow. Are you using the same lookup data set multiple times? If so, consider the file caching option in SSIS 2008 and beyond. Above all, experiment and be creative with different combinations. You may be surprised at what works. Final  thoughts If you want to know more about how the Lookup component differs in SSIS2008 from SSIS2005 then I have a dedicated blog post about that at Lookup component gets a makeover. I am on a mini-crusade at the moment to get a BULK MERGE feature into the database engine, the thinking being that if the database engine can quickly merge massive amounts of data in a similar manner to how it can insert massive amounts using BULK INSERT then that’s a lot of work that wouldn’t have to be done in the SSIS pipeline. If you think that is a good idea then go and vote for BULK MERGE on Connect. If you have any other tips to share then please stick them in the comments. Hope this helps! @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • How-to tell the ViewCriteria a user chose in an af:query component

    - by frank.nimphius
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US 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-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 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-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} The af:query component defines a search form for application users to enter search conditions for a selected View Criteria. A View Criteria is a named where clauses that you can create declaratively on the ADF Business Component View Object. A default View Criteria that allows users to search in all attributes exists by default and exposed in the Data Controls panel. To create an ADF Faces search form, expand the View Object node that contains the View Criteria definition in the Data Controls panel. Drag the View Criteria that should be displayed as the default criteria onto the page and choose Query in the opened context menu. One of the options within the Query option is to create an ADF Query Panel with Table, which displays the result set in a table view, which can have additional column filters defined. Normal 0 false false false EN-US 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-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 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-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} To intercept the user query for modification, or just to know about the selected View Criteria, you override the QueryListener property on the af:query component of the af:table component. Overriding the QueryListener on the table makes sense if the table allows users to further filter the result set using column filters.To override the default QueryListener, copy the existing string referencing the binding layer to the clipboard and then select Edit from the field context menu (press the arrow icon to open it) to selecte or create a new managed bean and method to handle the query event.  The code below is from a managed bean with custom query listener handlers defined for the af:query component and the af:table component. The default listener entry copied to the clipboard was "#{bindings.ImplicitViewCriteriaQuery.processQuery}"  public void onQueryList(QueryEvent queryEvent) {   // The generated QueryListener replaced by this method   //#{bindings.ImplicitViewCriteriaQuery.processQuery}        QueryDescriptor qdes = queryEvent.getDescriptor();          //print or log selected View Criteria   System.out.println("NAME "+qdes.getName());           //call default Query Event        invokeQueryEventMethodExpression("      #{bindings.ImplicitViewCriteriaQuery.processQuery}",queryEvent);  } public void onQueryTable(QueryEvent queryEvent) {   // The generated QueryListener replaced by this method   //#{bindings.ImplicitViewCriteriaQuery.processQuery}   QueryDescriptor qdes = queryEvent.getDescriptor();   //print or log selected View Criteria   System.out.println("NAME "+qdes.getName());                   invokeQueryEventMethodExpression(     "#{bindings.ImplicitViewCriteriaQuery.processQuery}",queryEvent); } private void invokeQueryEventMethodExpression(                        String expression, QueryEvent queryEvent){   FacesContext fctx = FacesContext.getCurrentInstance();   ELContext elctx = fctx.getELContext();   ExpressionFactory efactory   fctx.getApplication().getExpressionFactory();     MethodExpression me =     efactory.createMethodExpression(elctx,expression,                                     Object.class,                                     new Class[]{QueryEvent.class});     me.invoke(elctx, new Object[]{queryEvent}); } Of course, this code also can be used as a starting point for other query manipulations and also works with saved custom criterias. To read more about the af:query component, see: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E15523_01/apirefs.1111/e12419/tagdoc/af_query.html

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – SSIS Look Up Component – Cache Mode – Notes from the Field #028

    - by Pinal Dave
    [Notes from Pinal]: Lots of people think that SSIS is all about arranging various operations together in one logical flow. Well, the understanding is absolutely correct, but the implementation of the same is not as easy as it seems. Similarly most of the people think lookup component is just component which does look up for additional information and does not pay much attention to it. Due to the same reason they do not pay attention to the same and eventually get very bad performance. Linchpin People are database coaches and wellness experts for a data driven world. In this 28th episode of the Notes from the Fields series database expert Tim Mitchell (partner at Linchpin People) shares very interesting conversation related to how to write a good lookup component with Cache Mode. In SQL Server Integration Services, the lookup component is one of the most frequently used tools for data validation and completion.  The lookup component is provided as a means to virtually join one set of data to another to validate and/or retrieve missing values.  Properly configured, it is reliable and reasonably fast. Among the many settings available on the lookup component, one of the most critical is the cache mode.  This selection will determine whether and how the distinct lookup values are cached during package execution.  It is critical to know how cache modes affect the result of the lookup and the performance of the package, as choosing the wrong setting can lead to poorly performing packages, and in some cases, incorrect results. Full Cache The full cache mode setting is the default cache mode selection in the SSIS lookup transformation.  Like the name implies, full cache mode will cause the lookup transformation to retrieve and store in SSIS cache the entire set of data from the specified lookup location.  As a result, the data flow in which the lookup transformation resides will not start processing any data buffers until all of the rows from the lookup query have been cached in SSIS. The most commonly used cache mode is the full cache setting, and for good reason.  The full cache setting has the most practical applications, and should be considered the go-to cache setting when dealing with an untested set of data. With a moderately sized set of reference data, a lookup transformation using full cache mode usually performs well.  Full cache mode does not require multiple round trips to the database, since the entire reference result set is cached prior to data flow execution. There are a few potential gotchas to be aware of when using full cache mode.  First, you can see some performance issues – memory pressure in particular – when using full cache mode against large sets of reference data.  If the table you use for the lookup is very large (either deep or wide, or perhaps both), there’s going to be a performance cost associated with retrieving and caching all of that data.  Also, keep in mind that when doing a lookup on character data, full cache mode will always do a case-sensitive (and in some cases, space-sensitive) string comparison even if your database is set to a case-insensitive collation.  This is because the in-memory lookup uses a .NET string comparison (which is case- and space-sensitive) as opposed to a database string comparison (which may be case sensitive, depending on collation).  There’s a relatively easy workaround in which you can use the UPPER() or LOWER() function in the pipeline data and the reference data to ensure that case differences do not impact the success of your lookup operation.  Again, neither of these present a reason to avoid full cache mode, but should be used to determine whether full cache mode should be used in a given situation. Full cache mode is ideally useful when one or all of the following conditions exist: The size of the reference data set is small to moderately sized The size of the pipeline data set (the data you are comparing to the lookup table) is large, is unknown at design time, or is unpredictable Each distinct key value(s) in the pipeline data set is expected to be found multiple times in that set of data Partial Cache When using the partial cache setting, lookup values will still be cached, but only as each distinct value is encountered in the data flow.  Initially, each distinct value will be retrieved individually from the specified source, and then cached.  To be clear, this is a row-by-row lookup for each distinct key value(s). This is a less frequently used cache setting because it addresses a narrower set of scenarios.  Because each distinct key value(s) combination requires a relational round trip to the lookup source, performance can be an issue, especially with a large pipeline data set to be compared to the lookup data set.  If you have, for example, a million records from your pipeline data source, you have the potential for doing a million lookup queries against your lookup data source (depending on the number of distinct values in the key column(s)).  Therefore, one has to be keenly aware of the expected row count and value distribution of the pipeline data to safely use partial cache mode. Using partial cache mode is ideally suited for the conditions below: The size of the data in the pipeline (more specifically, the number of distinct key column) is relatively small The size of the lookup data is too large to effectively store in cache The lookup source is well indexed to allow for fast retrieval of row-by-row values No Cache As you might guess, selecting no cache mode will not add any values to the lookup cache in SSIS.  As a result, every single row in the pipeline data set will require a query against the lookup source.  Since no data is cached, it is possible to save a small amount of overhead in SSIS memory in cases where key values are not reused.  In the real world, I don’t see a lot of use of the no cache setting, but I can imagine some edge cases where it might be useful. As such, it’s critical to know your data before choosing this option.  Obviously, performance will be an issue with anything other than small sets of data, as the no cache setting requires row-by-row processing of all of the data in the pipeline. I would recommend considering the no cache mode only when all of the below conditions are true: The reference data set is too large to reasonably be loaded into SSIS memory The pipeline data set is small and is not expected to grow There are expected to be very few or no duplicates of the key values(s) in the pipeline data set (i.e., there would be no benefit from caching these values) Conclusion The cache mode, an often-overlooked setting on the SSIS lookup component, represents an important design decision in your SSIS data flow.  Choosing the right lookup cache mode directly impacts the fidelity of your results and the performance of package execution.  Know how this selection impacts your ETL loads, and you’ll end up with more reliable, faster packages. If you want me to take a look at your server and its settings, or if your server is facing any issue we can Fix Your SQL Server. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: Notes from the Field, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL Tagged: SSIS

    Read the article

  • Loose component cables causing HDMI video problems

    - by jwir3
    I'm not sure this is the correct forum, but I'll ask anyway. I have an A/V setup at home that has something like the following: Five Components (actually a few more, like a CD player, but they don't really relate to this question): Older Pioneer Receiver Digital Set Top Box Sony BluRay Player Samsung Plasma TV Speakers The reason for the receiver is so that all the sound can go through the speakers, rather than some going to the TV speakers and some to the external speakers. They are connected as follows: Digital Set Top Box connects via component video to Samsung TV directly via Component 2 (audio goes to Older Pioneer Receiver). Sony BluRay player is connected via HDMI 1 to TV, but audio goes to the receiver. Now, the problem I'm having is that when I have the digital set top box connected, there are times when the Netflix or Hulu streams I watch through the Sony BluRay player (it's connected to a router for internet access) will lose video. What I mean by this is that the sound of the episode will keep playing, but the screen will go black. If I jiggle the component cables, it will often come back. If I disconnect the component cables, it will always come back. I've noticed that one of the connections (the red component cable) doesn't like to sit very well in the component socket in the back of the digital set top box. It seems like there is a bad connection here, but it doesn't seem like this should be affecting the HDMI input at all. What I've noticed, though, is that when I disconnect the digital set top box completely (i.e. remove the component cable from the back of the TV), the problem seems to resolve itself. I'm not talking about actually removing the cable physically, because I thought perhaps the cables were mashing against one another, and possibly jiggling each other loose. To correct this possible problem, I took the component cable completely out of the cable ties it was in in the back of my entertainment center, as well as pulled the digital set top box out from the entertainment center altogether. It's now connected directly to the TV, without any other cables touching it to cause some kind of weird interference or just physical pulling on the cable. Same problem. If, however, I disconnect the component cable and just leave it sitting behind the TV, then the problem goes away. So, my question is this - what could be causing this? Is it a case where it's an improperly shielded component cable that's causing interference with the HDMI input, or something that's wrong with the TV? It's an intermittent problem, so it's difficult to track down. The TV isn't that old, so it's probably still under warranty. I'm just wondering if there is something else I can do that might reduce this problem without having to haul a massive television set out of my house to get repaired/replaced.

    Read the article

  • Application Architecture using WCF and System.AddIn

    - by Silverhalide
    A little background -- we're designing an application that uses a client/server architecture consisting of: A server which loads server-side modules, potentially developed by other teams. A client which loads corresponding client-side modules (also potentially developed by those other teams; each client module corresponds with a server module). The client side communicates with the server side for general coordination, and as well as module specific tasks. (At this point, I think that means client talks to server, client modules talk to server modules.) Environment is .NET 3.5, and client side is WPF. The deployment scenario introduces the potential to upgrade the server, any server-side module, the client, and any client-side module independently. However, being able to "work" using mismatched versions is required. I'm therefore concerned about versioning issues. My thinking so far: A Windows Service for the server. Using System.AddIn for the server to load and communicate with the server modules will give us the greatest flexibility in terms of version compatability between server and server modules. The server and each server module vend WCF services for communication to the client side; communication between the server and a server module, or between two server modules use the AddIn contracts. (One advantage of this is that a module can expose a different interface within the server and outside it.) Similarly, the client uses System.AddIn to find, load, and communicate with the client modules. Client communications with client modules is via the AddIn interface; communications from the client and from client modules to the server side are via WCF. For maximum resilience, each module will run in a separate app-domain. In general, the system has modest performance requirements, so marshalling and crossing process boundaries is not expected to be a performance concern. (Performance requirement is basically summed up by: don't get in the way of the other parts of the system not described here.) My questions are around the idea of having two different communication and versioning models to work with which will be an added burden on our developers. System.AddIn seems quite powerful, but also a little unwieldly. (I'm also unsure of Microsoft's commitment to it in the future.) On the other hand, I'm not thrilled with WCF's versioning capabilities. I have a feeling that it would be possible to implement the System.AddIn view/adapter/contract system within WCF, but being fairly new to both technologies, I would have no idea of where to start. So... Am I on the right track here? Am I doing this the hard way? Are there gotchas I need to be aware of on this road? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Architecture Suggestions/Recommendations for a Web Application with Sub-Apps

    - by user579218
    Hello. I’m starting to plan an architecture for a big web application, and I wanted to get suggestions and/or recommendations on where to begin and which technologies and/or frameworks to use. The application will be an Intranet-based web site using Windows authentication, running on IIS and using SQL Server and ASP.NET. It’ll need to be structured as a main/shell application with sub-applications that are “pluggable” based on some configuration settings. The main or shell application is to provide the overall user interface structure – header/footer, dynamically built tabs for each available sub-app, and a content area in which the sub-application will be loaded when the user clicks on the sub-application’s tab. So, on start-up of the main/shell application, configuration information will be queried from a database, and, based on the user and which of the sub-apps are available, the main or shell app would dynamically build tabs (or buttons or something) as a way to access each individual application. On start-up, the content area will be populated with the “home” sub-app. But, clicking on an sub-app tab will cause the content area to be populated with the sub-app corresponding to the tab. For example, we’re going to have a reports application, a display application, and probably a couple other distinct applications. On startup of the main/shell application, after determining who the user is, the main app will query the database to determine which sub-apps the user can use and build out the UI. Then the user can navigate between available sub-apps and do their work in each. Finally, the entire app and all sub-apps need to be a layered design with presentation, service, business, and data access layers, as well as cross-cutting objects for things such as logging, exception handling, etc. Anyway, my questions revolve around where to begin to plan something like this application. What technologies/frameworks would work best in developing a solution for this application? MVC? MVP? WCSF? EF? NHibernate? Enterprise Library? Repository Pattern? Others???? I know all these technologies/frameworks are not used for the same purpose, but knowing which ones to focus on is a little overwhelming. Which ones would be the best choice(s) for a solution? Which ones work well together for an end-to-end design? How would one structure the VS project for something like this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • EPM Architecture: Foundation

    - by Marc Schumacher
    This post is the first of a series that is going to describe the EPM System architecture per component. During the following weeks a couple of follow up posts will describe each component. If applicable, the component will have its standard port next to its name in brackets. EPM Foundation is Java based and consists of two web applications, Shared Services and Workspace. Both applications are accessed by browser through Oracle HTTP Server (OHS) or Internet Information Services (IIS). Communication to the backend database is done by JDBC. The file system to store Lifecycle Management (LCM) artifacts can be either local or remote (e.g. NFS, network share). For authentication purposes, the EPM Product Suite can connect to external directories or databases. Interaction with other EPM Suite components like product specific Lifecycle Management connectors or Reporting and Analysis Web happens through HTTP protocol. The next post will cover Reporting and Analysis.

    Read the article

  • Announcing the ADF Architecture Square at OOW12

    - by Chris Muir
    The ADF product management team are happy to announce at Oracle Open World the publication of the ADF Architecture Square: Over the last number of years Oracle has recognized that many customers have matured their ADF skills and are now looking for information on advanced concepts beyond the how-do-I-get-this-poplist-to-work type questions.  In order to satisfy this demand we've devised the ADF Architecture Square where papers, presentations and demos will consider such broad software engineering concepts as ADF architecture, development and testing, building and deployment, and infrastructure.   If you have a look at the site right now it's a rather modest affair, but we hope to continue to expand the content to give further guidance and information to help shortcut your ADF project needs.  Either watch the website or follow our dedicated @adfarchsquare twitter feed.

    Read the article

  • Architecture for a business objects / database access layer

    - by gregmac
    For various reasons, we are writing a new business objects/data storage library. One of the requirements of this layer is to separate the logic of the business rules, and the actual data storage layer. It is possible to have multiple data storage layers that implement access to the same object - for example, a main "database" data storage source that implements most objects, and another "ldap" source that implements a User object. In this scenario, User can optionally come from an LDAP source, perhaps with slightly different functionality (eg, not possible to save/update the User object), but otherwise it is used by the application the same way. Another data storage type might be a web service, or an external database. There are two main ways we are looking at implementing this, and me and a co-worker disagree on a fundamental level which is correct. I'd like some advice on which one is the best to use. I'll try to keep my descriptions of each as neutral as possible, as I'm looking for some objective view points here. Business objects are base classes, and data storage objects inherit business objects. Client code deals with data storage objects. In this case, common business rules are inherited by each data storage object, and it is the data storage objects that are directly used by the client code. This has the implication that client code determines which data storage method to use for a given object, because it has to explicitly declare an instance to that type of object. Client code needs to explicitly know connection information for each data storage type it is using. If a data storage layer implements different functionality for a given object, client code explicitly knows about it at compile time because the object looks different. If the data storage method is changed, client code has to be updated. Business objects encapsulate data storage objects. In this case, business objects are directly used by client application. Client application passes along base connection information to business layer. Decision about which data storage method a given object uses is made by business object code. Connection information would be a chunk of data taken from a config file (client app does not really know/care about details of it), which may be a single connection string for a database, or several pieces connection strings for various data storage types. Additional data storage connection types could also be read from another spot - eg, a configuration table in a database that specifies URLs to various web services. The benefit here is that if a new data storage method is added to an existing object, a configuration setting can be set at runtime to determine which method to use, and it is completely transparent to the client applications. Client apps do not need to be modified if data storage method for a given object changes. Business objects are base classes, data source objects inherit from business objects. Client code deals primarily with base classes. This is similar to the first method, but client code declares variables of the base business object types, and Load()/Create()/etc static methods on the business objects return the appropriate data source-typed objects. The architecture of this solution is similar to the first method, but the main difference is the decision about which data storage object to use for a given business object is made by the business layer, not the client code. I know there are already existing ORM libraries that provide some of this functionality, but please discount those for now (there is the possibility that a data storage layer is implemented with one of these ORM libraries) - also note I'm deliberately not telling you what language is being used here, other than that it is strongly typed. I'm looking for some general advice here on which method is better to use (or feel free to suggest something else), and why.

    Read the article

  • Domain Validation in a CQRS architecture

    - by Jupaol
    Basically I want to know if there is a better way to validate my domain entities. This is how I am planning to do it but I would like your opinion The first approach I considered was: class Customer : EntityBase<Customer> { public void ChangeEmail(string email) { if(string.IsNullOrWhitespace(email)) throw new DomainException(“...”); if(!email.IsEmail()) throw new DomainException(); if(email.Contains(“@mailinator.com”)) throw new DomainException(); } } I actually do not like this validation because even when I am encapsulating the validation logic in the correct entity, this is violating the Open/Close principle (Open for extension but Close for modification) and I have found that violating this principle, code maintenance becomes a real pain when the application grows up in complexity. Why? Because domain rules change more often than we would like to admit, and if the rules are hidden and embedded in an entity like this, they are hard to test, hard to read, hard to maintain but the real reason why I do not like this approach is: if the validation rules change, I have to come and edit my domain entity. This has been a really simple example but in RL the validation could be more complex So following the philosophy of Udi Dahan, making roles explicit, and the recommendation from Eric Evans in the blue book, the next try was to implement the specification pattern, something like this class EmailDomainIsAllowedSpecification : IDomainSpecification<Customer> { private INotAllowedEmailDomainsResolver invalidEmailDomainsResolver; public bool IsSatisfiedBy(Customer customer) { return !this.invalidEmailDomainsResolver.GetInvalidEmailDomains().Contains(customer.Email); } } But then I realize that in order to follow this approach I had to mutate my entities first in order to pass the value being valdiated, in this case the email, but mutating them would cause my domain events being fired which I wouldn’t like to happen until the new email is valid So after considering these approaches, I came out with this one, since I am going to implement a CQRS architecture: class EmailDomainIsAllowedValidator : IDomainInvariantValidator<Customer, ChangeEmailCommand> { public void IsValid(Customer entity, ChangeEmailCommand command) { if(!command.Email.HasValidDomain()) throw new DomainException(“...”); } } Well that’s the main idea, the entity is passed to the validator in case we need some value from the entity to perform the validation, the command contains the data coming from the user and since the validators are considered injectable objects they could have external dependencies injected if the validation requires it. Now the dilemma, I am happy with a design like this because my validation is encapsulated in individual objects which brings many advantages: easy unit test, easy to maintain, domain invariants are explicitly expressed using the Ubiquitous Language, easy to extend, validation logic is centralized and validators can be used together to enforce complex domain rules. And even when I know I am placing the validation of my entities outside of them (You could argue a code smell - Anemic Domain) but I think the trade-off is acceptable But there is one thing that I have not figured out how to implement it in a clean way. How should I use this components... Since they will be injected, they won’t fit naturally inside my domain entities, so basically I see two options: Pass the validators to each method of my entity Validate my objects externally (from the command handler) I am not happy with the option 1 so I would explain how I would do it with the option 2 class ChangeEmailCommandHandler : ICommandHandler<ChangeEmailCommand> { public void Execute(ChangeEmailCommand command) { private IEnumerable<IDomainInvariantValidator> validators; // here I would get the validators required for this command injected, and in here I would validate them, something like this using (var t = this.unitOfWork.BeginTransaction()) { var customer = this.unitOfWork.Get<Customer>(command.CustomerId); this.validators.ForEach(x =. x.IsValid(customer, command)); // here I know the command is valid // the call to ChangeEmail will fire domain events as needed customer.ChangeEmail(command.Email); t.Commit(); } } } Well this is it. Can you give me your thoughts about this or share your experiences with Domain entities validation EDIT I think it is not clear from my question, but the real problem is: Hiding the domain rules has serious implications in the future maintainability of the application, and also domain rules change often during the life-cycle of the app. Hence implementing them with this in mind would let us extend them easily. Now imagine in the future a rules engine is implemented, if the rules are encapsulated outside of the domain entities, this change would be easier to implement

    Read the article

  • Trash Destination Adapter

    The Trash Destination and this article came from early experiences of using SSIS and community feedback at the time. When developing a package it is very useful to have a destination adapter that does nothing but consume rows with no setup requirement. You often want run a package part way through development, or just add a path so you can set a Data Viewer. There are stock tasks that can be used, but with the Trash Destination all columns are treated as selected automatically (usage type of read-only), so the pipeline knows they are required. It is also obvious that this is for development or diagnostic purposes, and is clearly not a part of the functional design of the package. It is also ideal for just playing around and exploring concepts in SSIS, and is often used in conjunction with the Data Generator Source. Using these two components it is easy to setup a test of an expression in the Derived Column Transformation for example. The Data Generator Source provides some dummy data, and the Trash Destination allows you to anchor the output path and set a Data Viewer to examine the results. It can also be used when performance tuning packages. It is a consistent and known quantity that has no external influences, so it is ideal as a destination when breaking the data flow into sections to isolate a bottleneck. The adapter is really simple to use and requires no setup. Simply drop it onto the pipeline designer and use it to terminate your data flow path. Installation The component is provided as an MSI file which you can download and run to install it. This simply places the files on disk in the correct locations and also installs the assemblies in the Global Assembly Cache as per Microsoft’s recommendations. You may need to restart the SQL Server Integration Services service, as this caches information about what components are installed, as well as restarting any open instances of Business Intelligence Development Studio (BIDS) / Visual Studio that you may be using to build your SSIS packages. Finally, for 2005/2008, you will have to add the transformation to the Visual Studio toolbox manually. Right-click the toolbox, and select Choose Items.... Select the SSIS Data Flow Items tab, and then check the Trash Destination transformation in the Choose Toolbox Items window. This process has been described in detail in the related FAQ entry for How do I install a task or transform component? We recommend you follow best practice and apply the current Microsoft SQL Server Service pack to your SQL Server servers and workstations. Downloads The Trash Destination is available for SQL Server 2005, SQL Server 2008 (includes R2) and SQL Server 2012. Please choose the version to match your SQL Server version, or you can install multiple versions and use them side by side if you have more than one version of SQL Server installed. Trash Destination for SQL Server 2005 Trash Destination for SQL Server 2008 Trash Destination for SQL Server 2012 Version History SQL Server 2012 Version 3.0.0.34 - SQL Server 2012 release. Includes upgrade support for both 2005 and 2008 packages to 2012. (5 Jun 2012) SQL Server 2008 Version 2.0.0.33 - SQL Server 2008 release. Includes support for upgrade of 2005 packages. RTM compatible, previously February 2008 CTP. (4 Mar 2008) Version 2.0.0.31 - SQL Server 2008 November 2007 CTP. (14 Feb 2008) SQL Server 2005 Version 1.0.2.18 - SQL Server 2005 RTM Refresh. SP1 Compatibility Testing. (12 Jun 2006) Version 1.0.1.1 - SQL Server 2005 IDW 15 June CTP. Minor enhancements over v1.0.1.0. (11 Jun 2005) Version 1.0.1.0 - SQL Server 2005 IDW 14 April CTP. First Public Release. (30 May 2005) Troubleshooting Make sure you have downloaded the version that matches your version of SQL Server. We offer separate downloads for SQL Server 2005, SQL Server 2008 and SQL Server 2012. If you an error when you try and use the component along the lines of The component could not be added to the Data Flow task. Please verify that this component is properly installed.  ... The data flow object "Konesans ..." is not installed correctly on this computer, this usually indicates that the internal cache of SSIS components needs to be updated. This is held by the SSIS service, so you need restart the the SQL Server Integration Services service. You can do this from the Services applet in Control Panel or Administrative Tools in Windows. You can also restart the computer if you prefer. You may also need to restart any current instances of Business Intelligence Development Studio (BIDS) / Visual Studio that you may be using to build your SSIS packages. The full error message is shown below for reference: TITLE: Microsoft Visual Studio ------------------------------ The component could not be added to the Data Flow task. Please verify that this component is properly installed. ------------------------------ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The data flow object "Konesans.Dts.Pipeline.TrashDestination.Trash, Konesans.Dts.Pipeline.TrashDestination, Version=1.0.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b8351fe7752642cc" is not installed correctly on this computer. (Microsoft.DataTransformationServices.Design) For 2005/2008, once installation is complete you need to manually add the task to the toolbox before you will see it and to be able add it to packages - How do I install a task or transform component? This is not necessary for SQL Server 2012 as the new SSIS toolbox automatically detects components. If you are still having issues then contact us, but please provide as much detail as possible about error, as well as which version of the the task you are using and details of the SSIS tools installed.

    Read the article

  • What does "enterprise" means in relation to software architecture?

    - by SkonJeet
    I see the term "enterprise" being thrown around software developers and programmers a lot and used loosely it seems. en·ter·prise/'ent?r?priz/ Noun: A project or undertaking, typically one that is difficult or requires effort. Initiative and resourcefulness. Can someone please clarify what this term actually encompasses? "At an enterprise level", "enterprise scale"? There are even "enterprise editions" of things. What exactly does it mean? It obviously doesn't make sense judging by the above definition so more specifically to software what does one mean when using the word enterprise? EDIT: To add a spin on this - how does this term then fit into phrases such as Enterprise Framework Model? What does data access and data context have to do with company-wide descriptions?

    Read the article

  • What should be the architecture of an urban game system?

    - by pmichna
    I'm going to develop an urban game using a telco API for phone geolocation and sending/receiving messages. A player would pick up one of the scenarios, move around the city and when he hits a given location, he gets a message and possibly has to answer it. I'm wondering, what approach would be the best in my case. I came up with this general idea: Web application as a user interface (user registration, players ranking, scenarios editing) written in Ruby on Rails. Game server (hosting games, game logic like checking players location, sending and receiving messages) written in Ruby. Database (users, scores, scenarios etc.), probably MySQL or someother open source DB. I want to learn Ruby and RoR, that's why I chose these language and framework. Do you think it's a good choice for a game server? Another question: is this project division good? I mean, I have little experience with Ruby and Rails - that's why I'm asking. Maybe it's better to have web application merged with game server and somehow have the server hosting RoR application do the tasks like mobile phone pinging and message sending? How would that be performed? Maybe this is worth mentioning: the API is RESTful, most results are JSON, few are XML.

    Read the article

  • Where do service implementations fit into the Microsoft Application Architecture guidelines?

    - by tuespetre
    The guidelines discuss the service layer with its service interfaces and data/message/fault contracts. They also discuss the business layer with its logic/workflow components and entities as well as the 'optional' application facade. What is unclear still to me after studying this guide is where the implementations of the service interfaces belong. Does the application facade in the business layer implement these interfaces, or does a separate 'service facade' exist to make calls to the business layer and it's facade/raw components? (With the former, there would be less seemingly trivial calls to yet another layer, though with the latter I could see how the service layer could remove the concerns of translating business entities to data contracts from the business layer.)

    Read the article

  • How are components properly instantiated and used in XNA 4.0?

    - by Christopher Horenstein
    I am creating a simple input component to hold on to actions and key states, and a short history of the last ten or so states. The idea is that everything that is interested in input will ask this component for the latest input, and I am wondering where I should create it. I am also wondering how I should create components that are specific to my game objects - I envision them as variables, but then how do their Update/Draw methods get called? What I'm trying to ask is, what are the best practices for adding components to the proper collections? Right now I've added my input component in the main Game class that XNA creates when everything is first initialized, saying something along the lines of this.Components.Add(new InputComponent(this)), which looks a little odd to me, and I'd still want to hang onto that reference so I can ask it things. An answer to my input component's dilemma is great, but also I'm guessing there is a right way to do this in general in XNA.

    Read the article

  • How do I architect 2 plugins that share a common component?

    - by James
    I have an object that takes in data and spits out a transformed output, called IBaseItem. I also have two parsers, IParserA and IParserB. These parsers transform external data (in format dataA and dataB respectively) to a format usable by my IBaseItem (baseData). I want to create 2 systems, one that works with dataA and one that works with dataB. They will allow the user to enter data and match it to the right plugins/implementations and transform the data to outData. I want to write these traffic cops myself, but have other people provide the parsers and baseitem logic, and and as such am implementing these items as plugins (hence the use of interfaces). Other programmers can choose to implement 1 or both parsers. Q: How should I structure the way base items and parsers are associated, stored, and loaded into each of my programs? Class Relations: What I've Tried: Initially I though there should be a different dll for each of my 2 traffic cops, that each have a parser and baseitem in them. However, the duplication of baseitem logic doesn't seem right (especially if the base item logic changes). I then thought the base items could all have their own dll, and then somehow associate parsers and baseitems (guids?), but I don't know if implementing the overhead id/association is adding too much complexion.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu Slow - What architecture does the Windows Installer install?

    - by Benjamin Yep
    I feel absolutely limited by using Windows, and I need to switch to a Unix environment. I once installed Red Hat on my lappie (screen + external monitor setup; 4GB ram; x64; runs fast) and it worked fine, but I saw that the computer cluster that is the birthplace of my unix knowledge switched to Ubuntu, so naturally I follow. To the point. When I installed Ubuntu onto my machine via the Windows Installer, it ran quite slow. Opening Firefox takes about 8-9 seconds, it freezes up often, unable to handle its own background processes. I saw in a thread that, perhaps, it is running slow because the Windows Installer is installing an x64 version. Of course, my computer has had no performance issues in the past(except that time with the trojans but you know, know one is perfect ;) ) Anyways, I uninstalled Ubuntu, freeing up the max allocated memory it took up, and continue to be sad, trapped in my MS world with only a buggy Cygwin, any assistance is greatly appreciated! :) Thanks ~Ben

    Read the article

  • Why did the team at LMAX use Java and design the architecture to avoid GC at all cost?

    - by kadaj
    Why did the team at LMAX design the LMAX Disruptor in Java but all their design points to minimizing GC use? If one does not want to have GC run then why use a garbage collected language? Their optimizations, the level of hardware knowledge and the thought they put are just awesome but why Java? I'm not against Java or anything, but why a GC language? Why not use something like D or any other language without GC but allows efficient code? Is it that the team is most familiar with Java or does Java possess some unique advantage that I am not seeing? Say they develop it using D with manual memory management, what would be the difference? They would have to think low level (which they already are), but they can squeeze the best performance out of the system as it's native.

    Read the article

  • How are the conceptual pairs Abstract/Concrete, Generic/Specific, and Complex/Simple related to one another in software architecture?

    - by tjb1982
    (= 2 (+ 1 1)) take the above. The requirement of the '=' predicate is that its arguments be comparable. Any two structures are comparable in this case, and so the contract/requirement is pretty generic. The '+' predicate requires that its arguments be numbers. That's more specific. (socket domain type protocol) the arguments here are much more specific (even though the arguments are still just numbers and the function itself returns a file descriptor, which is itself an int), but the arguments are more abstract, and the implementation is built up from other functions whose abstractions are less abstract, which are themselves built from less and less abstract abstractions. To the point where the requirements are something like move from one location to another, observe whether the switch at that location is on or off, turn the switch on or off, or leave it the same, etc. But are functions also less and less complex the less abstract they are? And is there a relationship between the number and range of arguments of a function and the complexity of its implementation, as you go from more abstract to less abstract, and vice versa? (= 2 (+ 1 1) 2r10) the '=' predicate is more generic than the '+' predicate, and thus could be more complex in its implementation. The '+' predicate's contract is less generic, and so could be less complex in its implementation. Is this even a little correct? What about the 'socket' function? Each of those arguments is a number of some kind. What they represent, though, is something more elaborate. It also returns a number (just like the others do), which is also a representation of something conceptually much more elaborate than a number. To boil it down, I'm asking if there is a relationship between the following dimensions, and why: Abstract/Concrete Complex/Simple Generic/Specific And more specifically, do different configurations of these dimensions have a specific, measurable impact on the number and range of the arguments (i.e., the contract) of a function?

    Read the article

  • Advice welcomed on creating my own Swing component

    - by Toto
    Recently I asked which was the best Swing component to bind to a BigDecimal variable (with some particular editing properties). It turns out that none of the standard Swing components suit me completely, nor did the third-party Swing component libraries I've found out there. So I’ve decided to create my own Swing component. Component description: I want to extend JTextField or JFormattedTextField, so my new component can be easily bound to a BigDecimal variable. The component will have customizable scale and length properties. Behavior: When the component is drawn, it shows only the decimal point and space for scale digits to its right. When the component receives focus the caret should be positioned left to the decimal point. As the user types numbers (any other character is ignored) they appear to the left of the caret, only length – scale numbers are accepted, any other number typed is ignored as the integer portion is full. Any time the user types the decimal point the caret moves to the right side of the decimal point. The following numbers typed are shown in the decimal part, only scale numbers are considered any other number typed is ignored as the decimal portion is full. Additionally, thousand separators should appear as the user types numbers left to the decimal point. Invoking a getValue() method on the component should yield the BigDecimal representing the number just entered. I’ve never created my own Swing component; I’ve barely used the standard ones. So I would appreciate any good tutorial/info/tip on creating the component described. This is the only thing I've got so far. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >