Search Results

Search found 1125 results on 45 pages for 'bhoomi nature'.

Page 19/45 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • The Product Owner

    - by Robert May
    In a previous post, I outlined the rules of Scrum.  This post details one of those rules. Picking a most important part of Scrum is difficult.  All of the rules are required, but if there were one rule that is “more” required that every other rule, its having a good Product Owner.  Simply put, the Product Owner can make or break the project. Duties of the Product Owner A Product Owner has many duties and responsibilities.  I’ll talk about each of these duties in detail below. A Product Owner: Discovers and records stories for the backlog. Prioritizes stories in the Product Backlog, Release Backlog and Iteration Backlog. Determines Release dates and Iteration Dates. Develops story details and helps the team understand those details. Helps QA to develop acceptance tests. Interact with the Customer to make sure that the product is meeting the customer’s needs. Discovers and Records Stories for the Backlog When I do Scrum, I always use User Stories as the means for capturing functionality that’s required in the system.  Some people will use Use Cases, but the same rule applies.  The Product Owner has the ultimate responsibility for figuring out what functionality will be in the system.  Many different mechanisms for capturing this input can be used.  User interviews are great, but all sources should be considered, including talking with Customer Support types.  Often, they hear what users are struggling with the most and are a great source for stories that can make the application easier to use. Care should be taken when soliciting user stories from technical types such as programmers and the people that manage them.  They will almost always give stories that are very technical in nature and may not have a direct benefit for the end user.  Stories are about adding value to the company.  If the stories don’t have direct benefit to the end user, the Product Owner should question whether or not the story should be implemented.  In general, technical stories should be included as tasks in User Stories.  Technical stories are often needed, but the ultimate value to the user is in user based functionality, so technical stories should be considered nothing more than overhead in providing that user functionality. Until the iteration prior to development, stories should be nothing more than short, one line placeholders. An exercise called Story Planning can be used to brainstorm and come up with stories.  I’ll save the description of this activity for another blog post. For more information on User Stories, please read the book User Stories Applied by Mike Cohn. Prioritizes Stories in the Product Backlog, Release Backlog and Iteration Backlog Prioritization of stories is one of the most difficult tasks that a Product Owner must do.  A key concept of Scrum done right is the need to have the team working from a single set of prioritized stories.  If the team does not have a single set of prioritized stories, Scrum will likely fail at your organization.  The Product Owner is the ONLY person who has the responsibility to prioritize that list.  The Product Owner must be very diplomatic and sincerely listen to the people around him so that he can get the priorities correct. Just listening will still not yield the proper priorities.  Care must also be taken to ensure that Return on Investment is also considered.  Ultimately, determining which stories give the most value to the company for the least cost is the most important factor in determining priorities.  Product Owners should be willing to look at cold, hard numbers to determine the order for stories.  Even when many people want a feature, if that features is costly to develop, it may not have as high of a return on investment as features that are cheaper, but not as popular. The act of prioritization often causes conflict in an environment.  Customer Service thinks that feature X is the most important, because it will stop people from calling.  Operations thinks that feature Y is the most important, because it will stop servers from crashing.  Developers think that feature Z is most important because it will make writing software much easier for them.  All of these are useful goals, but the team can have only one list of items, and each item must have a priority that is different from all other stories.  The Product Owner will determine which feature gives the best return on investment and the other features will have to wait their turn, which means that someone will not have their top priority feature implemented first. A weak Product Owner will refuse to do prioritization.  I’ve heard from multiple Product Owners the following phrase, “Well, it’s all got to be done, so what does it matter what order we do it in?”  If your product owner is using this phrase, you need a new Product Owner.  Order is VERY important.  In Scrum, every release is potentially shippable.  If the wrong priority items are developed, then the value added in each release isn’t what it should be.  Additionally, the Product Owner with this mindset doesn’t understand Agile.  A product is NEVER finished, until the company has decided that it is no longer a going concern and they are no longer going to sell the product.  Therefore, prioritization isn’t an event, its something that continues every day.  The logical extension of the phrase “It’s all got to be done” is that you will never ship your product, since a product is never “done.”  Once stories have been prioritized, assigning them to the Release Backlog and the Iteration Backlog becomes relatively simple.  The top priority items are copied into the respective backlogs in order and the task is complete.  The team does have the right to shuffle things around a little in the iteration backlog.  For example, they may determine that working on story C with story A is appropriate because they’re related, even though story B is technically a higher priority than story C.  Or they may decide that story B is too big to complete in the time available after Story A has tasks created, so they’ll work on Story C since it’s smaller.  They can’t, however, go deep into the backlog to pick stories to implement.  The team and the Product Owner should work together to determine what’s best for the company. Prioritization is time consuming, but its one of the most important things a Product Owner does. Determines Release Dates and Iteration Dates Product owners are responsible for determining release dates for a product.  A common misconception that Product Owners have is that every “release” needs to correspond with an actual release to customers.  This is not the case.  In general, releases should be no more than 3 months long.  You  may decide to release the product to the customers, and many companies do release the product to customers, but it may also be an internal release. If a release date is too far away, developers will fall into the trap of not feeling a sense of urgency.  The date is far enough away that they don’t need to give the release their full attention.  Additionally, important tasks, such as performance tuning, regression testing, user documentation, and release preparation, will not happen regularly, making them much more difficult and time consuming to do.  The more frequently you do these tasks, the easier they are to accomplish. The Product Owner will be a key participant in determining whether or not a release should be sent out to the customers.  The determination should be made on whether or not the features contained in the release are valuable enough  and complete enough that the customers will see real value in the release.  Often, some features will take more than three months to get them to a state where they qualify for a release or need additional supporting features to be released.  The product owner has the right to make this determination. In addition to release dates, the Product Owner also will help determine iteration dates.  In general, an iteration length should be chosen and the team should follow that iteration length for an extended period of time.  If the iteration length is changed every iteration, you’re not doing Scrum.  Iteration lengths help the team and company get into a rhythm of developing quality software.  Iterations should be somewhere between 2 and 4 weeks in length.  Any shorter, and significant software will likely not be developed.  Any longer, and the team won’t feel urgency and planning will become very difficult. Iterations may not be extended during the iteration.  Companies where Scrum isn’t really followed will often use this as a strategy to complete all stories.  They don’t want to face the harsh reality of what their true performance is, and looking good is more important than seeking visibility and improving the process and team.  Companies like this typically don’t allow failure.  This is unhealthy.  Failure is part of life and unless we learn from it, we can’t improve.  I would much rather see a team push out stories to the next iteration and then have healthy discussions about why they failed rather than extend the iteration and not deal with the core problems. If iteration length varies, retrospectives become more difficult.  For example, evaluating the performance of the team’s estimation efforts becomes much more difficult if the iteration length varies.  Also, the team must have a velocity measurement.  If the iteration length varies, measuring velocity becomes impossible and upper management no longer will have the ability to evaluate the teams performance.  People external to the team will no longer have the ability to determine when key features are likely to be developed.  Variable iterations cause the entire company to fail and likely cause Scrum to fail at an organization. Develops Story Details and Helps the Team Understand Those Details A key concept in Scrum is that the stories are nothing more than a placeholder for a conversation.  Stories should be nothing more than short, one line statements about the functionality.  The team will then converse with the Product Owner about the details about that story.  The product owner needs to have a very good idea about what the details of the story are and needs to be able to help the team understand those details. Too often, we see this requirement as being translated into the need for comprehensive documentation about the story, including old fashioned requirements documentation.  The team should only develop the documentation that is required and should not develop documentation that is only created because their is a process to do so. In general, what we see that works best is the iteration before a team starts development work on a story, the Product Owner, with other appropriate business analysts, will develop the details of that story.  They’ll figure out what business rules are required, potentially make paper prototypes or other light weight mock-ups, and they seek to understand the story and what is implied.  Note that the time allowed for this task is deliberately short.  The Product Owner only has a single iteration to develop all of the stories for the next iteration. If more than one iteration is used, I’ve found that teams will end up with Big Design Up Front and traditional requirements documents.  This is a waste of time, since the team will need to then have discussions with the Product Owner to figure out what the requirements document says.  Instead of this, skip making the pretty pictures and detailing the nuances of the requirements and build only what is minimally needed by the team to do development.  If something comes up during development, you can address it at that time and figure out what you want to do.  The goal is to keep things as light weight as possible so that everyone can move as quickly as possible. Helps QA to Develop Acceptance Tests In Scrum, no story can be counted until it is accepted by QA.  Because of this, acceptance tests are very important to the team.  In general, acceptance tests need to be developed prior to the iteration or at the very beginning of the iteration so that the team can make sure that the tasks that they develop will fulfill the acceptance criteria. The Product Owner will help the team, including QA, understand what will make the story acceptable.  Note that the Product Owner needs to be careful about specifying that the feature will work “Perfectly” at the end of the iteration.  In general, features are developed a little bit at a time, so only the bit that is being developed should be considered as necessary for acceptance. A weak Product Owner will make statements like “Do it right the first time.”  Not only are these statements damaging to the team (like they would try to do it WRONG the first time . . .), they’re also ignoring the iterative nature of Scrum.  Additionally, a weak product owner will seek to add scope in the acceptance testing.  For example, they will refuse to determine acceptance at the beginning of the iteration, and then, after the team has planned and committed to the iteration, they will expand scope by defining acceptance.  This often causes the team to miss the iteration because scope that wasn’t planned on is included.  There are ways that the team can mitigate this problem.  For example, include extra “Product Owner” time to deal with the uncertainty that you know will be introduced by the Product Owner.  This will slow the perceived velocity of the team and is not ideal, since they’ll be doing more work than they get credit for. Interact with the Customer to Make Sure that the Product is Meeting the Customer’s Needs Once development is complete, what the team has worked on should be put in front of real live people to see if it meets the needs of the customer.  One of the great things about Agile is that if something doesn’t work, we can revisit it in a future iteration!  This frees up the team to make the best decision now and know that if that decision proves to be incorrect, the team can revisit it and change that decision. Features are about adding value to the customer, so if the customer doesn’t find them useful, then having the team make tweaks is valuable.  In general, most software will be 80 to 90 percent “right” after the initial round and only minor tweaks are required.  If proper coding standards are followed, these tweaks are usually minor and easy to accomplish.  Product Owners that are doing a good job will encourage real users to see and use the software, since they know that they are trying to add value to the customer. Poor product owners will think that they know the answers already, that their customers are silly and do stupid things and that they don’t need customer input.  If you have a product owner that is afraid to show the team’s work to real customers, you probably need a different product owner. Up Next, “Who Makes a Good Product Owner.” Followed by, “Messing with the Team.” Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

    Read the article

  • Currency Conversion in Oracle BI applications

    - by Saurabh Verma
    Authored by Vijay Aggarwal and Hichem Sellami A typical data warehouse contains Star and/or Snowflake schema, made up of Dimensions and Facts. The facts store various numerical information including amounts. Example; Order Amount, Invoice Amount etc. With the true global nature of business now-a-days, the end-users want to view the reports in their own currency or in global/common currency as defined by their business. This presents a unique opportunity in BI to provide the amounts in converted rates either by pre-storing or by doing on-the-fly conversions while displaying the reports to the users. Source Systems OBIA caters to various source systems like EBS, PSFT, Sebl, JDE, Fusion etc. Each source has its own unique and intricate ways of defining and storing currency data, doing currency conversions and presenting to the OLTP users. For example; EBS stores conversion rates between currencies which can be classified by conversion rates, like Corporate rate, Spot rate, Period rate etc. Siebel stores exchange rates by conversion rates like Daily. EBS/Fusion stores the conversion rates for each day, where as PSFT/Siebel store for a range of days. PSFT has Rate Multiplication Factor and Rate Division Factor and we need to calculate the Rate based on them, where as other Source systems store the Currency Exchange Rate directly. OBIA Design The data consolidation from various disparate source systems, poses the challenge to conform various currencies, rate types, exchange rates etc., and designing the best way to present the amounts to the users without affecting the performance. When consolidating the data for reporting in OBIA, we have designed the mechanisms in the Common Dimension, to allow users to report based on their required currencies. OBIA Facts store amounts in various currencies: Document Currency: This is the currency of the actual transaction. For a multinational company, this can be in various currencies. Local Currency: This is the base currency in which the accounting entries are recorded by the business. This is generally defined in the Ledger of the company. Global Currencies: OBIA provides five Global Currencies. Three are used across all modules. The last two are for CRM only. A Global currency is very useful when creating reports where the data is viewed enterprise-wide. Example; a US based multinational would want to see the reports in USD. The company will choose USD as one of the global currencies. OBIA allows users to define up-to five global currencies during the initial implementation. The term Currency Preference is used to designate the set of values: Document Currency, Local Currency, Global Currency 1, Global Currency 2, Global Currency 3; which are shared among all modules. There are four more currency preferences, specific to certain modules: Global Currency 4 (aka CRM Currency) and Global Currency 5 which are used in CRM; and Project Currency and Contract Currency, used in Project Analytics. When choosing Local Currency for Currency preference, the data will show in the currency of the Ledger (or Business Unit) in the prompt. So it is important to select one Ledger or Business Unit when viewing data in Local Currency. More on this can be found in the section: Toggling Currency Preferences in the Dashboard. Design Logic When extracting the fact data, the OOTB mappings extract and load the document amount, and the local amount in target tables. It also loads the exchange rates required to convert the document amount into the corresponding global amounts. If the source system only provides the document amount in the transaction, the extract mapping does a lookup to get the Local currency code, and the Local exchange rate. The Load mapping then uses the local currency code and rate to derive the local amount. The load mapping also fetches the Global Currencies and looks up the corresponding exchange rates. The lookup of exchange rates is done via the Exchange Rate Dimension provided as a Common/Conforming Dimension in OBIA. The Exchange Rate Dimension stores the exchange rates between various currencies for a date range and Rate Type. Two physical tables W_EXCH_RATE_G and W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G are used to provide the lookups and conversions between currencies. The data is loaded from the source system’s Ledger tables. W_EXCH_RATE_G stores the exchange rates between currencies with a date range. On the other hand, W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G stores the currency conversions between the document currency and the pre-defined five Global Currencies for each day. Based on the requirements, the fact mappings can decide and use one or both tables to do the conversion. Currency design in OBIA also taps into the MLS and Domain architecture, thus allowing the users to map the currencies to a universal Domain during the implementation time. This is especially important for companies deploying and using OBIA with multiple source adapters. Some Gotchas to Look for It is necessary to think through the currencies during the initial implementation. 1) Identify various types of currencies that are used by your business. Understand what will be your Local (or Base) and Documentation currency. Identify various global currencies that your users will want to look at the reports. This will be based on the global nature of your business. Changes to these currencies later in the project, while permitted, but may cause Full data loads and hence lost time. 2) If the user has a multi source system make sure that the Global Currencies and Global Rate Types chosen in Configuration Manager do have the corresponding source specific counterparts. In other words, make sure for every DW specific value chosen for Currency Code or Rate Type, there is a source Domain mapping already done. Technical Section This section will briefly mention the technical scenarios employed in the OBIA adaptors to extract data from each source system. In OBIA, we have two main tables which store the Currency Rate information as explained in previous sections. W_EXCH_RATE_G and W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G are the two tables. W_EXCH_RATE_G stores all the Currency Conversions present in the source system. It captures data for a Date Range. W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G has Global Currency Conversions stored at a Daily level. However the challenge here is to store all the 5 Global Currency Exchange Rates in a single record for each From Currency. Let’s voyage further into the Source System Extraction logic for each of these tables and understand the flow briefly. EBS: In EBS, we have Currency Data stored in GL_DAILY_RATES table. As the name indicates GL_DAILY_RATES EBS table has data at a daily level. However in our warehouse we store the data with a Date Range and insert a new range record only when the Exchange Rate changes for a particular From Currency, To Currency and Rate Type. Below are the main logical steps that we employ in this process. (Incremental Flow only) – Cleanup the data in W_EXCH_RATE_G. Delete the records which have Start Date > minimum conversion date Update the End Date of the existing records. Compress the daily data from GL_DAILY_RATES table into Range Records. Incremental map uses $$XRATE_UPD_NUM_DAY as an extra parameter. Generate Previous Rate, Previous Date and Next Date for each of the Daily record from the OLTP. Filter out the records which have Conversion Rate same as Previous Rates or if the Conversion Date lies within a single day range. Mark the records as ‘Keep’ and ‘Filter’ and also get the final End Date for the single Range record (Unique Combination of From Date, To Date, Rate and Conversion Date). Filter the records marked as ‘Filter’ in the INFA map. The above steps will load W_EXCH_RATE_GS. Step 0 updates/deletes W_EXCH_RATE_G directly. SIL map will then insert/update the GS data into W_EXCH_RATE_G. These steps convert the daily records in GL_DAILY_RATES to Range records in W_EXCH_RATE_G. We do not need such special logic for loading W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G. This is a table where we store data at a Daily Granular Level. However we need to pivot the data because the data present in multiple rows in source tables needs to be stored in different columns of the same row in DW. We use GROUP BY and CASE logic to achieve this. Fusion: Fusion has extraction logic very similar to EBS. The only difference is that the Cleanup logic that was mentioned in step 0 above does not use $$XRATE_UPD_NUM_DAY parameter. In Fusion we bring all the Exchange Rates in Incremental as well and do the cleanup. The SIL then takes care of Insert/Updates accordingly. PeopleSoft:PeopleSoft does not have From Date and To Date explicitly in the Source tables. Let’s look at an example. Please note that this is achieved from PS1 onwards only. 1 Jan 2010 – USD to INR – 45 31 Jan 2010 – USD to INR – 46 PSFT stores records in above fashion. This means that Exchange Rate of 45 for USD to INR is applicable for 1 Jan 2010 to 30 Jan 2010. We need to store data in this fashion in DW. Also PSFT has Exchange Rate stored as RATE_MULT and RATE_DIV. We need to do a RATE_MULT/RATE_DIV to get the correct Exchange Rate. We generate From Date and To Date while extracting data from source and this has certain assumptions: If a record gets updated/inserted in the source, it will be extracted in incremental. Also if this updated/inserted record is between other dates, then we also extract the preceding and succeeding records (based on dates) of this record. This is required because we need to generate a range record and we have 3 records whose ranges have changed. Taking the same example as above, if there is a new record which gets inserted on 15 Jan 2010; the new ranges are 1 Jan to 14 Jan, 15 Jan to 30 Jan and 31 Jan to Next available date. Even though 1 Jan record and 31 Jan have not changed, we will still extract them because the range is affected. Similar logic is used for Global Exchange Rate Extraction. We create the Range records and get it into a Temporary table. Then we join to Day Dimension, create individual records and pivot the data to get the 5 Global Exchange Rates for each From Currency, Date and Rate Type. Siebel: Siebel Facts are dependent on Global Exchange Rates heavily and almost none of them really use individual Exchange Rates. In other words, W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G is the main table used in Siebel from PS1 release onwards. As of January 2002, the Euro Triangulation method for converting between currencies belonging to EMU members is not needed for present and future currency exchanges. However, the method is still available in Siebel applications, as are the old currencies, so that historical data can be maintained accurately. The following description applies only to historical data needing conversion prior to the 2002 switch to the Euro for the EMU member countries. If a country is a member of the European Monetary Union (EMU), you should convert its currency to other currencies through the Euro. This is called triangulation, and it is used whenever either currency being converted has EMU Triangulation checked. Due to this, there are multiple extraction flows in SEBL ie. EUR to EMU, EUR to NonEMU, EUR to DMC and so on. We load W_EXCH_RATE_G through multiple flows with these data. This has been kept same as previous versions of OBIA. W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G being a new table does not have such needs. However SEBL does not have From Date and To Date columns in the Source tables similar to PSFT. We use similar extraction logic as explained in PSFT section for SEBL as well. What if all 5 Global Currencies configured are same? As mentioned in previous sections, from PS1 onwards we store Global Exchange Rates in W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G table. The extraction logic for this table involves Pivoting data from multiple rows into a single row with 5 Global Exchange Rates in 5 columns. As mentioned in previous sections, we use CASE and GROUP BY functions to achieve this. This approach poses a unique problem when all the 5 Global Currencies Chosen are same. For example – If the user configures all 5 Global Currencies as ‘USD’ then the extract logic will not be able to generate a record for From Currency=USD. This is because, not all Source Systems will have a USD->USD conversion record. We have _Generated mappings to take care of this case. We generate a record with Conversion Rate=1 for such cases. Reusable Lookups Before PS1, we had a Mapplet for Currency Conversions. In PS1, we only have reusable Lookups- LKP_W_EXCH_RATE_G and LKP_W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G. These lookups have another layer of logic so that all the lookup conditions are met when they are used in various Fact Mappings. Any user who would want to do a LKP on W_EXCH_RATE_G or W_GLOBAL_EXCH_RATE_G should and must use these Lookups. A direct join or Lookup on the tables might lead to wrong data being returned. Changing Currency preferences in the Dashboard: In the 796x series, all amount metrics in OBIA were showing the Global1 amount. The customer needed to change the metric definitions to show them in another Currency preference. Project Analytics started supporting currency preferences since 7.9.6 release though, and it published a Tech note for other module customers to add toggling between currency preferences to the solution. List of Currency Preferences Starting from 11.1.1.x release, the BI Platform added a new feature to support multiple currencies. The new session variable (PREFERRED_CURRENCY) is populated through a newly introduced currency prompt. This prompt can take its values from the xml file: userpref_currencies_OBIA.xml, which is hosted in the BI Server installation folder, under :< home>\instances\instance1\config\OracleBIPresentationServicesComponent\coreapplication_obips1\userpref_currencies.xml This file contains the list of currency preferences, like“Local Currency”, “Global Currency 1”,…which customers can also rename to give them more meaningful business names. There are two options for showing the list of currency preferences to the user in the dashboard: Static and Dynamic. In Static mode, all users will see the full list as in the user preference currencies file. In the Dynamic mode, the list shown in the currency prompt drop down is a result of a dynamic query specified in the same file. Customers can build some security into the rpd, so the list of currency preferences will be based on the user roles…BI Applications built a subject area: “Dynamic Currency Preference” to run this query, and give every user only the list of currency preferences required by his application roles. Adding Currency to an Amount Field When the user selects one of the items from the currency prompt, all the amounts in that page will show in the Currency corresponding to that preference. For example, if the user selects “Global Currency1” from the prompt, all data will be showing in Global Currency 1 as specified in the Configuration Manager. If the user select “Local Currency”, all amount fields will show in the Currency of the Business Unit selected in the BU filter of the same page. If there is no particular Business Unit selected in that filter, and the data selected by the query contains amounts in more than one currency (for example one BU has USD as a functional currency, the other has EUR as functional currency), then subtotals will not be available (cannot add USD and EUR amounts in one field), and depending on the set up (see next paragraph), the user may receive an error. There are two ways to add the Currency field to an amount metric: In the form of currency code, like USD, EUR…For this the user needs to add the field “Apps Common Currency Code” to the report. This field is in every subject area, usually under the table “Currency Tag” or “Currency Code”… In the form of currency symbol ($ for USD, € for EUR,…) For this, the user needs to format the amount metrics in the report as a currency column, by specifying the currency tag column in the Column Properties option in Column Actions drop down list. Typically this column should be the “BI Common Currency Code” available in every subject area. Select Column Properties option in the Edit list of a metric. In the Data Format tab, select Custom as Treat Number As. Enter the following syntax under Custom Number Format: [$:currencyTagColumn=Subjectarea.table.column] Where Column is the “BI Common Currency Code” defined to take the currency code value based on the currency preference chosen by the user in the Currency preference prompt.

    Read the article

  • 64-bit Archives Needed

    - by user9154181
    A little over a year ago, we received a question from someone who was trying to build software on Solaris. He was getting errors from the ar command when creating an archive. At that time, the ar command on Solaris was a 32-bit command. There was more than 2GB of data, and the ar command was hitting the file size limit for a 32-bit process that doesn't use the largefile APIs. Even in 2011, 2GB is a very large amount of code, so we had not heard this one before. Most of our toolchain was extended to handle 64-bit sized data back in the 1990's, but archives were not changed, presumably because there was no perceived need for it. Since then of course, programs have continued to get larger, and in 2010, the time had finally come to investigate the issue and find a way to provide for larger archives. As part of that process, I had to do a deep dive into the archive format, and also do some Unix archeology. I'm going to record what I learned here, to document what Solaris does, and in the hope that it might help someone else trying to solve the same problem for their platform. Archive Format Details Archives are hardly cutting edge technology. They are still used of course, but their basic form hasn't changed in decades. Other than to fix a bug, which is rare, we don't tend to touch that code much. The archive file format is described in /usr/include/ar.h, and I won't repeat the details here. Instead, here is a rough overview of the archive file format, implemented by System V Release 4 (SVR4) Unix systems such as Solaris: Every archive starts with a "magic number". This is a sequence of 8 characters: "!<arch>\n". The magic number is followed by 1 or more members. A member starts with a fixed header, defined by the ar_hdr structure in/usr/include/ar.h. Immediately following the header comes the data for the member. Members must be padded at the end with newline characters so that they have even length. The requirement to pad members to an even length is a dead giveaway as to the age of the archive format. It tells you that this format dates from the 1970's, and more specifically from the era of 16-bit systems such as the PDP-11 that Unix was originally developed on. A 32-bit system would have required 4 bytes, and 64-bit systems such as we use today would probably have required 8 bytes. 2 byte alignment is a poor choice for ELF object archive members. 32-bit objects require 4 byte alignment, and 64-bit objects require 64-bit alignment. The link-editor uses mmap() to process archives, and if the members have the wrong alignment, we have to slide (copy) them to the correct alignment before we can access the ELF data structures inside. The archive format requires 2 byte padding, but it doesn't prohibit more. The Solaris ar command takes advantage of this, and pads ELF object members to 8 byte boundaries. Anything else is padded to 2 as required by the format. The archive header (ar_hdr) represents all numeric values using an ASCII text representation rather than as binary integers. This means that an archive that contains only text members can be viewed using tools such as cat, more, or a text editor. The original designers of this format clearly thought that archives would be used for many file types, and not just for objects. Things didn't turn out that way of course — nearly all archives contain relocatable objects for a single operating system and machine, and are used primarily as input to the link-editor (ld). Archives can have special members that are created by the ar command rather than being supplied by the user. These special members are all distinguished by having a name that starts with the slash (/) character. This is an unambiguous marker that says that the user could not have supplied it. The reason for this is that regular archive members are given the plain name of the file that was inserted to create them, and any path components are stripped off. Slash is the delimiter character used by Unix to separate path components, and as such cannot occur within a plain file name. The ar command hides the special members from you when you list the contents of an archive, so most users don't know that they exist. There are only two possible special members: A symbol table that maps ELF symbols to the object archive member that provides it, and a string table used to hold member names that exceed 15 characters. The '/' convention for tagging special members provides room for adding more such members should the need arise. As I will discuss below, we took advantage of this fact to add an alternate 64-bit symbol table special member which is used in archives that are larger than 4GB. When an archive contains ELF object members, the ar command builds a special archive member known as the symbol table that maps all ELF symbols in the object to the archive member that provides it. The link-editor uses this symbol table to determine which symbols are provided by the objects in that archive. If an archive has a symbol table, it will always be the first member in the archive, immediately following the magic number. Unlike member headers, symbol tables do use binary integers to represent offsets. These integers are always stored in big-endian format, even on a little endian host such as x86. The archive header (ar_hdr) provides 15 characters for representing the member name. If any member has a name that is longer than this, then the real name is written into a special archive member called the string table, and the member's name field instead contains a slash (/) character followed by a decimal representation of the offset of the real name within the string table. The string table is required to precede all normal archive members, so it will be the second member if the archive contains a symbol table, and the first member otherwise. The archive format is not designed to make finding a given member easy. Such operations move through the archive from front to back examining each member in turn, and run in O(n) time. This would be bad if archives were commonly used in that manner, but in general, they are not. Typically, the ar command is used to build an new archive from scratch, inserting all the objects in one operation, and then the link-editor accesses the members in the archive in constant time by using the offsets provided by the symbol table. Both of these operations are reasonably efficient. However, listing the contents of a large archive with the ar command can be rather slow. Factors That Limit Solaris Archive Size As is often the case, there was more than one limiting factor preventing Solaris archives from growing beyond the 32-bit limits of 2GB (32-bit signed) and 4GB (32-bit unsigned). These limits are listed in the order they are hit as archive size grows, so the earlier ones mask those that follow. The original Solaris archive file format can handle sizes up to 4GB without issue. However, the ar command was delivered as a 32-bit executable that did not use the largefile APIs. As such, the ar command itself could not create a file larger than 2GB. One can solve this by building ar with the largefile APIs which would allow it to reach 4GB, but a simpler and better answer is to deliver a 64-bit ar, which has the ability to scale well past 4GB. Symbol table offsets are stored as 32-bit big-endian binary integers, which limits the maximum archive size to 4GB. To get around this limit requires a different symbol table format, or an extension mechanism to the current one, similar in nature to the way member names longer than 15 characters are handled in member headers. The size field in the archive member header (ar_hdr) is an ASCII string capable of representing a 32-bit unsigned value. This places a 4GB size limit on the size of any individual member in an archive. In considering format extensions to get past these limits, it is important to remember that very few archives will require the ability to scale past 4GB for many years. The old format, while no beauty, continues to be sufficient for its purpose. This argues for a backward compatible fix that allows newer versions of Solaris to produce archives that are compatible with older versions of the system unless the size of the archive exceeds 4GB. Archive Format Differences Among Unix Variants While considering how to extend Solaris archives to scale to 64-bits, I wanted to know how similar archives from other Unix systems are to those produced by Solaris, and whether they had already solved the 64-bit issue. I've successfully moved archives between different Unix systems before with good luck, so I knew that there was some commonality. If it turned out that there was already a viable defacto standard for 64-bit archives, it would obviously be better to adopt that rather than invent something new. The archive file format is not formally standardized. However, the ar command and archive format were part of the original Unix from Bell Labs. Other systems started with that format, extending it in various often incompatible ways, but usually with the same common shared core. Most of these systems use the same magic number to identify their archives, despite the fact that their archives are not always fully compatible with each other. It is often true that archives can be copied between different Unix variants, and if the member names are short enough, the ar command from one system can often read archives produced on another. In practice, it is rare to find an archive containing anything other than objects for a single operating system and machine type. Such an archive is only of use on the type of system that created it, and is only used on that system. This is probably why cross platform compatibility of archives between Unix variants has never been an issue. Otherwise, the use of the same magic number in archives with incompatible formats would be a problem. I was able to find information for a number of Unix variants, described below. These can be divided roughly into three tribes, SVR4 Unix, BSD Unix, and IBM AIX. Solaris is a SVR4 Unix, and its archives are completely compatible with those from the other members of that group (GNU/Linux, HP-UX, and SGI IRIX). AIX AIX is an exception to rule that Unix archive formats are all based on the original Bell labs Unix format. It appears that AIX supports 2 formats (small and big), both of which differ in fundamental ways from other Unix systems: These formats use a different magic number than the standard one used by Solaris and other Unix variants. They include support for removing archive members from a file without reallocating the file, marking dead areas as unused, and reusing them when new archive items are inserted. They have a special table of contents member (File Member Header) which lets you find out everything that's in the archive without having to actually traverse the entire file. Their symbol table members are quite similar to those from other systems though. Their member headers are doubly linked, containing offsets to both the previous and next members. Of the Unix systems described here, AIX has the only format I saw that will have reasonable insert/delete performance for really large archives. Everyone else has O(n) performance, and are going to be slow to use with large archives. BSD BSD has gone through 4 versions of archive format, which are described in their manpage. They use the same member header as SVR4, but their symbol table format is different, and their scheme for long member names puts the name directly after the member header rather than into a string table. GNU/Linux The GNU toolchain uses the SVR4 format, and is compatible with Solaris. HP-UX HP-UX seems to follow the SVR4 model, and is compatible with Solaris. IRIX IRIX has 32 and 64-bit archives. The 32-bit format is the standard SVR4 format, and is compatible with Solaris. The 64-bit format is the same, except that the symbol table uses 64-bit integers. IRIX assumes that an archive contains objects of a single ELFCLASS/MACHINE, and any archive containing ELFCLASS64 objects receives a 64-bit symbol table. Although they only use it for 64-bit objects, nothing in the archive format limits it to ELFCLASS64. It would be perfectly valid to produce a 64-bit symbol table in an archive containing 32-bit objects, text files, or anything else. Tru64 Unix (Digital/Compaq/HP) Tru64 Unix uses a format much like ours, but their symbol table is a hash table, making specific symbol lookup much faster. The Solaris link-editor uses archives by examining the entire symbol table looking for unsatisfied symbols for the link, and not by looking up individual symbols, so there would be no benefit to Solaris from such a hash table. The Tru64 ld must use a different approach in which the hash table pays off for them. Widening the existing SVR4 archive symbol tables rather than inventing something new is the simplest path forward. There is ample precedent for this approach in the ELF world. When ELF was extended to support 64-bit objects, the approach was largely to take the existing data structures, and define 64-bit versions of them. We called the old set ELF32, and the new set ELF64. My guess is that there was no need to widen the archive format at that time, but had there been, it seems obvious that this is how it would have been done. The Implementation of 64-bit Solaris Archives As mentioned earlier, there was no desire to improve the fundamental nature of archives. They have always had O(n) insert/delete behavior, and for the most part it hasn't mattered. AIX made efforts to improve this, but those efforts did not find widespread adoption. For the purposes of link-editing, which is essentially the only thing that archives are used for, the existing format is adequate, and issues of backward compatibility trump the desire to do something technically better. Widening the existing symbol table format to 64-bits is therefore the obvious way to proceed. For Solaris 11, I implemented that, and I also updated the ar command so that a 64-bit version is run by default. This eliminates the 2 most significant limits to archive size, leaving only the limit on an individual archive member. We only generate a 64-bit symbol table if the archive exceeds 4GB, or when the new -S option to the ar command is used. This maximizes backward compatibility, as an archive produced by Solaris 11 is highly likely to be less than 4GB in size, and will therefore employ the same format understood by older versions of the system. The main reason for the existence of the -S option is to allow us to test the 64-bit format without having to construct huge archives to do so. I don't believe it will find much use outside of that. Other than the new ability to create and use extremely large archives, this change is largely invisible to the end user. When reading an archive, the ar command will transparently accept either form of symbol table. Similarly, the ELF library (libelf) has been updated to understand either format. Users of libelf (such as the link-editor ld) do not need to be modified to use the new format, because these changes are encapsulated behind the existing functions provided by libelf. As mentioned above, this work did not lift the limit on the maximum size of an individual archive member. That limit remains fixed at 4GB for now. This is not because we think objects will never get that large, for the history of computing says otherwise. Rather, this is based on an estimation that single relocatable objects of that size will not appear for a decade or two. A lot can change in that time, and it is better not to overengineer things by writing code that will sit and rot for years without being used. It is not too soon however to have a plan for that eventuality. When the time comes when this limit needs to be lifted, I believe that there is a simple solution that is consistent with the existing format. The archive member header size field is an ASCII string, like the name, and as such, the overflow scheme used for long names can also be used to handle the size. The size string would be placed into the archive string table, and its offset in the string table would then be written into the archive header size field using the same format "/ddd" used for overflowed names.

    Read the article

  • What to filter when providing very limited open WiFi to a small conference or meeting?

    - by Tim Farley
    Executive Summary The basic question is: if you have a very limited bandwidth WiFi to provide Internet for a small meeting of only a day or two, how do you set the filters on the router to avoid one or two users monopolizing all the available bandwidth? For folks who don't have the time to read the details below, I am NOT looking for any of these answers: Secure the router and only let a few trusted people use it Tell everyone to turn off unused services & generally police themselves Monitor the traffic with a sniffer and add filters as needed I am aware of all of that. None are appropriate for reasons that will become clear. ALSO NOTE: There is already a question concerning providing adequate WiFi at large (500 attendees) conferences here. This question concerns SMALL meetings of less than 200 people, typically with less than half that using the WiFi. Something that can be handled with a single home or small office router. Background I've used a 3G/4G router device to provide WiFi to small meetings in the past with some success. By small I mean single-room conferences or meetings on the order of a barcamp or Skepticamp or user group meeting. These meetings sometimes have technical attendees there, but not exclusively. Usually less than half to a third of the attendees will actually use the WiFi. Maximum meeting size I'm talking about is 100 to 200 people. I typically use a Cradlepoint MBR-1000 but many other devices exist, especially all-in-one units supplied by 3G and/or 4G vendors like Verizon, Sprint and Clear. These devices take a 3G or 4G internet connection and fan it out to multiple users using WiFi. One key aspect of providing net access this way is the limited bandwidth available over 3G/4G. Even with something like the Cradlepoint which can load-balance multiple radios, you are only going to achieve a few megabits of download speed and maybe a megabit or so of upload speed. That's a best case scenario. Often it is considerably slower. The goal in most of these meeting situations is to allow folks access to services like email, web, social media, chat services and so on. This is so they can live-blog or live-tweet the proceedings, or simply chat online or otherwise stay in touch (with both attendees and non-attendees) while the meeting proceeds. I would like to limit the services provided by the router to just those services that meet those needs. Problems In particular I have noticed a couple of scenarios where particular users end up abusing most of the bandwidth on the router, to the detriment of everyone. These boil into two areas: Intentional use. Folks looking at YouTube videos, downloading podcasts to their iPod, and otherwise using the bandwidth for things that really aren't appropriate in a meeting room where you should be paying attention to the speaker and/or interacting.At one meeting that we were live-streaming (over a separate, dedicated connection) via UStream, I noticed several folks in the room that had the UStream page up so they could interact with the meeting chat - apparently oblivious that they were wasting bandwidth streaming back video of something that was taking place right in front of them. Unintentional use. There are a variety of software utilities that will make extensive use of bandwidth in the background, that folks often have installed on their laptops and smartphones, perhaps without realizing.Examples: Peer to peer downloading programs such as Bittorrent that run in the background Automatic software update services. These are legion, as every major software vendor has their own, so one can easily have Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, Adobe, Google and others all trying to download updates in the background. Security software that downloads new signatures such as anti-virus, anti-malware, etc. Backup software and other software that "syncs" in the background to cloud services. For some numbers on how much network bandwidth gets sucked up by these non-web, non-email type services, check out this recent Wired article. Apparently web, email and chat all together are less than one quarter of the Internet traffic now. If the numbers in that article are correct, by filtering out all the other stuff I should be able to increase the usefulness of the WiFi four-fold. Now, in some situations I've been able to control access using security on the router to limit it to a very small group of people (typically the organizers of the meeting). But that's not always appropriate. At an upcoming meeting I would like to run the WiFi without security and let anyone use it, because it happens at the meeting location the 4G coverage in my town is particularly excellent. In a recent test I got 10 Megabits down at the meeting site. The "tell people to police themselves" solution mentioned at top is not appropriate because of (a) a largely non-technical audience and (b) the unintentional nature of much of the usage as described above. The "run a sniffer and filter as needed" solution is not useful because these meetings typically only last a couple of days, often only one day, and have a very small volunteer staff. I don't have a person to dedicate to network monitoring, and by the time we got the rules tweaked completely the meeting will be over. What I've Got First thing, I figured I would use OpenDNS's domain filtering rules to filter out whole classes of sites. A number of video and peer-to-peer sites can be wiped out using this. (Yes, I am aware that filtering via DNS technically leaves the services accessible - remember, these are largely non-technical users attending a 2 day meeting. It's enough). I figured I would start with these selections in OpenDNS's UI: I figure I will probably also block DNS (port 53) to anything other than the router itself, so that folks can't bypass my DNS configuration. A savvy user could get around this, because I'm not going to put a lot of elaborate filters on the firewall, but I don't care too much. Because these meetings don't last very long, its probably not going to be worth the trouble. This should cover the bulk of the non-web traffic, i.e. peer-to-peer and video if that Wired article is correct. Please advise if you think there are severe limitations to the OpenDNS approach. What I Need Note that OpenDNS focuses on things that are "objectionable" in some context or another. Video, music, radio and peer-to-peer all get covered. I still need to cover a number of perfectly reasonable things that we just want to block because they aren't needed in a meeting. Most of these are utilities that upload or download legit things in the background. Specifically, I'd like to know port numbers or DNS names to filter in order to effectively disable the following services: Microsoft automatic updates Apple automatic updates Adobe automatic updates Google automatic updates Other major software update services Major virus/malware/security signature updates Major background backup services Other services that run in the background and can eat lots of bandwidth I also would like any other suggestions you might have that would be applicable. Sorry to be so verbose, but I find it helps to be very, very clear on questions of this nature, and I already have half a solution with the OpenDNS thing.

    Read the article

  • Anybody using Orchard CMS?

    - by Clarence Klopfstein
    This question is a bit subjective in nature, but I am unsure if there is a better place to ask this in the family of sites. Is anybody using the new Orchard CMS on a public facing site? For those that don't know, Orchard is basically the replacement for Oxite. It is an ASP.NET MVC based CMS. I've pulled it down and compiled it, but it seems pretty far away from being used on an actual site. If you are using it, would love to know.

    Read the article

  • Repository Pattern with Entity Framework 3.5 and MVVM

    - by Ravi
    I am developing a Database File System. I am using - .Net framework 3.5 Entity Framework 3.5 WPF with MVVM pattern The project spans across multiple assemblies each using same model. One assembly,let's call it a "server", only adds data to the database using EF i.e. same model.Other assemblies (including the UI) both reads and writes the data.The changes made by server should immediately reflect in other assemblies. The database contains self referencing tables where each entity can have single OR no parent and (may be) some children. I want to use repository pattern which can also provide some mechanism to handle this hierarchical nature. I have already done reading on this on Code Project. It shares the same context(entities) everywhere. My question is - Should I share the same context everywhere? What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing that?

    Read the article

  • Repository Pattern with Entity Framework 3.5

    - by Ravi
    I am developing a Database File System. I am using - .Net framework 3.5 Entity Framework 3.5 WPF with MVVM pattern The project spans across multiple assemblies each using same model. One assembly,let's call it a "server", only adds data to the database using EF i.e. same model.Other assemblies (including the UI) both reads and writes the data.The changes made by server should immediately reflect in other assemblies. The database contains self referencing tables where each entity can have single OR no parent and (may be) some children. I want to use repository pattern which can also provide some mechanism to handle this hierarchical nature. I have already done reading on this on Code Project. It shares the same context(entities) everywhere. My question is - Should I share the same context everywhere? What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing that?

    Read the article

  • Repository Pattern with Entity Framework 3.5

    - by Ravi
    I am developing a Database File System. I am using - .Net framework 3.5 Entity Framework 3.5 WPF with MVVM pattern The project spans across multiple assemblies each using same model. One assembly,let's call it a "server", only adds data to the database using EF i.e. same model.Other assemblies (including the UI) both reads and writes the data.The changes made by server should immediately reflect in other assemblies. The database contains self referencing tables where each entity can have single OR no parent and (may be) some children. I want to use repository pattern which can also provide some mechanism to handle this hierarchical nature. I have already done reading on this on Code Project. It shares the same context(entities) everywhere. My question is - Should I share the same context everywhere? What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing that?

    Read the article

  • Code to plug into a Zend Framework project

    - by bluedaniel
    Hello everyone, Im currently working on a website in the Zend Framework and finding it very useful indeed. I want both a blog and a forum in this website and wondered if there are any open-source projects of this nature that I would be able to simply copy and paste into my modular project. I was using Wordpress and BBpress previously so something like that would be good, although I do not want to hack my Zend Auth to use the Wordpress authentication system, seems like too much hard work/hacky to do. So any ideas? Plus where are the best Zend framework 'plugins' (similar to wordpress)? Thanks everyone.

    Read the article

  • Silverlight 3 Offline Mode

    - by GWLlosa
    Has anyone found that the userbase is more reluctant to install Silverlight 3 Apps in offline mode because they have no control over "where" the app is installed to? I've had a few issues of a similar nature in the past, with 'power users' getting upset that they can't specify install directories. Are there any workarounds? Any way to get the Silverlight offline installs to prompt for specific install locations and the like? The specific reason given is that users want to install apps to remote storage, like a USB stick or something.

    Read the article

  • Conversion of bytes into a type without changing the application (ie storing the conversion method i

    - by geoaxis
    Is there a way to store a conversion strategy (for converting some bytes) into a database and then execute it on the run time. If one were to store a complete java file, you would need to compile it, store the class and some how inject into the already running system. I am not sure how this would be possible. But using some kind of dynamic language on JVM would be nice. I see an example of execution of groovy from within spring context here http://www.devx.com/tips/Tip/42789 but this is still static in nature as application context contains the reference to the implementation and cannot be changed by database. Perhaps with JavaConfig of context it is possible. I am exploring options now, specifically with Spring 3.0. Your suggestions in any direction would be welcome.

    Read the article

  • MS Build Script accepting a list or collection of project names to build and deploy

    - by Darryn Parker
    I want to create a MS Build script (executed by way of TFS Build Server) that will accept a list of project names that need to be built, unit tested and deployed. The reason is that I want one script to serve many 'like' structured solutions. All the solutions are SOA in nature and share the same framework, project structure and deployment requirements. I've done this in Nant and acheived great success out of having one build file serving 4 solutions - it just accepted a list of web project names to compile and deploy to our test/uat environments. What is the syntax to cycle through a collection of project names suppled as params via MS Build?

    Read the article

  • PHP - can a method return a pointer?

    - by Kerry
    I have a method in a class trying to return a pointer: <?php public function prepare( $query ) { // bla bla bla return &$this->statement; } ?> But it produces the following error: Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '&' in /home/realst34/public_html/s98_fw/classes/sql.php on line 246 This code, however, works: <?php public function prepare( $query ) { // bla bla bla $statement = &$this->statement; return $statement; } ?> Is this just the nature of PHP or am I doing something wrong?

    Read the article

  • REST api design to retrieve summary information

    - by Jacques René Mesrine
    I have a scenario in which I have REST API which manages a Resource which we will call Group. A Group is similar in concept to a discussion forum in Google Groups. Now I have two GET access method which I believe needs separate representations. The 1st GET access method retrieves the minimal amount of information about a Group. Given a *group_id* it should return a minimal amount of information like { group_id: "5t7yu8i9io0op", group_name: "Android Developers", is_moderated: true, number_of_users: 34, new_messages: 5, icon: "http://boo.com/pic.png" } The 2nd GET access method retrives summary information which are more statistical in nature like: { group_id: "5t7yu8i9io0op", top_ranking_users: { [ { user: "george", posts: 789, rank: 1 }, { user: "joel", posts: 560, rank: 2 } ...] }, popular_topics: { [ ... ] } } I want to separate these data access methods and I'm currently planning on this design: GET /group/:group_id/ GET /group/:group_id/stat Only the latter will return the statistical information about the group. What do you think about this ?

    Read the article

  • What to do with CSV after export on the iPhone?

    - by alku83
    One of the requested features for my apps is to have an export feature. Most of the time the data is table-like in nature. As an example, users might enter every day what types of food they ate that day, and how many portions of each food type. As the data is table-like, I figure the most useful for export would be into CSV format. Then it can be read in spreadsheet software. I'm confident I can get the data into a CSV like format without too much trouble, and found this post would should help me: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1512883/how-to-convert-data-to-csv-or-html-format What I'm wondering about is what I can do with the file once it has been created? Can I attach it to an email? How else can I make it available to the user so that it has some use? Alternatively, am I going about this the wrong way and would there be a better way to offer an export function?

    Read the article

  • which open source license to use for libraries depending on other libraries

    - by openCage
    I develop a couple of open source projects licensed under MPL1.1. All projects depend on a lot of other open source tools. I avoid any GPL licensed libraries for the viral nature of GPL. The licenses of the libraries my tools depend on are Apache2, LGPL2, LGPL3, CPL, BSD, JSON, MIT and some personal agreements. My applications are licensed under MPL1.1 but now I want to publish some libraries. Which license is compatible with all of the above ? comfortable for the user ? My suspicion is that MPL1.1 is not that good as a library license. I'd like the libraries to be used.

    Read the article

  • RESTful API Documentation

    - by PartlyCloudy
    I'm going to design a RESTful API soon, thus I need to describe it in order to enable other people to start implementing clients using it. I've looked around a bit, but unfortunately, I've not found any standardized form of describing web-based RESTful services. What I'am looking for is something like JavaDoc, although it don't have to be generated out of any sort of code. I'm also not talking about something like WADL, I rather want to have some human-readable documentation I can hand out. Due to the nature of RESTful web-based services, it should be quite easy to standardize a documentation. It should just list available ressources, corresponding URIs, allowed methods, content-types and describe the availabe actions. Do you have any suggestions therefore? Thanks in advance & Greets

    Read the article

  • Database design for very large amount of data

    - by Hossein
    Hi, I am working on a project, involving large amount of data from the delicious website.The data available is at files are "Date,UserId,Url,Tags" (for each bookmark). I normalized my database to a 3NF, and because of the nature of the queries that we wanted to use In combination I came down to 6 tables....The design looks fine, however, now a large amount of data is in the database, most of the queries needs to "join" at least 2 tables together to get the answer, sometimes 3 or 4. At first, we didn't have any performance issues, because for testing matters we haven't had added too much data in the database. No that we have a lot of data, simply joining extremely large tables does take a lot of time and for our project which has to be real-time is a disaster.I was wondering how big companies solve these issues.Looks like normalizing tables just adds complexity, but how does the big company handle large amounts of data in their databases, don't they do the normalization? thanks

    Read the article

  • WebDAV auto-versioning in Git or Hg or any modern VCS

    - by Marcus P S
    I just recently learned of SVN's auto-versioning feature for WebDAV. Although I understand this is not replacement for proper versioning, with messages documenting change sets, it strikes me as a solid and safe replacement to Dropbox (minus nice GUIs and web pages). However, since commits in auto-versioning are frequent, I'd imagine that Git or Hg would be better suited for this, just because of their more compact databases (although I wonder if the distributed nature of things could make the automation ugly for resolving conflicts). Is this a feature that has been implemented using Git or Hg, as far as anyone knows?

    Read the article

  • Check for Block Ads/Scripts (Browser Addons, Compatibility)

    - by acidzombie24
    I'm conflicted. you guys decide if this should migrate to SU or not. I would like to test my site against popular browser ad ons. ATM i have tested against noscript and adblock plus for firefox. What other popular ad ons should i check compatibility with? By compatibility i mean to work as intent on browsers i support (opera, firefox, chrome, IE 7/8) which include ads. NoScript broke my site and for adblock plus i ask once per week to consider allowing ads. When i see IE6 i notify the user the site is known to be unusable with that browser (The site is script heavy by nature and i wouldnt want to accidentally serve ads to infect users of IE6 with a virus).

    Read the article

  • F# currying efficiency?

    - by Eamon Nerbonne
    I have a function that looks as follows: let isInSet setElems normalize p = normalize p |> (Set.ofList setElems).Contains This function can be used to quickly check whether an element is semantically part of some set; for example, to check if a file path belongs to an html file: let getLowerExtension p = (Path.GetExtension p).ToLowerInvariant() let isHtmlPath = isInSet [".htm"; ".html"; ".xhtml"] getLowerExtension However, when I use a function such as the above, performance is poor since evaluation of the function body as written in "isInSet" seems to be delayed until all parameters are known - in particular, invariant bits such as (Set.ofList setElems).Contains are reevaluated each execution of isHtmlPath. How can best I maintain F#'s succint, readable nature while still getting the more efficient behavior in which the set construction is preevaluated. The above is just an example; I'm looking for a general pattern that avoids bogging me down in implementation details - where possible I'd like to avoid being distracted by details such as the implementation's execution order since that's usually not important to me and kind of undermines a major selling point of functional programming.

    Read the article

  • JDBC resultset close

    - by KM
    I am doing profiling of my Java application and found some interesting statistics for a jdbc PreparedStatement call: Given below is the environment details: Database: Sybase SQL Anywhere 10.0.1 Driver: com.sybase.jdbc3.jdbc.SybDriver connection pool: c3p0 JRE: 1.6.0_05 The code in question is given below: try { ps = conn.prepareStatement(sql); ps.setDouble(...); rs = ps.executeQuery(); ...... return xyz; } finally { try { if (rs != null) rs.close(); if (ps != null) ps.close(); } catch (SQLException sqlEx) { } } From JProfiler stats, I find that this particular resultspace.close() statement alone takes a large amount of time. It varies from 25 ms to 320s while for other code blocks which are of identical in nature, i find that this takes close to 20 microseconds. Just to be sure, I ran this performance test multiple times and confirmed this data. I am puzzled by this behaviour - Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Classes / instances in Ontology

    - by SODA
    Hi, I'm trying to comprehend ontology basics. Here's an example: car (class) 2009 VW CC (sub-class or instance?) My neighbor's 2009 VW CC (instance) My issue is understanding what is "2009 VW CC" (as a car model). If you're making product model a sub-class in the ontology - all of a sudden your ontology becomes bloated with thousands of subclasses of a "car". That's redundant. At the same time we can't say "2009 VW CC" is an instance, at least it's not material instance of a class. Does it make sense to distinguish between regular instances and material (distinct physical objects)? At the other hand, if both are instances (of different nature so to say), then how can instance inherit properties / relations of a non-class?

    Read the article

  • T-SQL IsNumeric() and Linq-to-SQL

    - by cdonner
    I need to find the highest value from the database that satisfies a certain formatting convention. Specifically, I would like to fund the highest value that looks like EU999999 ('9' being any digit) select max(col) will return something like 'EUZ...' for instance that I want to exclude. The following query does the trick, but I can't produce this via Linq-to-SQL. There seems to be no translation for the isnumeric() function in SQL Server. select max(col) from table where col like 'EU%' and 1=isnumeric(replace(col, 'EU', '')) Writing a database function, stored procedure, or anything else of that nature is far down the list of my preferred solutions, because this table is central to my app and I cannot easily replace the table object with something else. What's the next-best solution?

    Read the article

  • Style: Dot notation vs. message notation in Objective-C 2.0

    - by groundhog
    In Objective-C 2.0 we got the "dot" notation for properties. I've seen various back and forths about the merits of dot notation vs. message notation. To keep the responses untainted I'm not going to respond either way in the question. What is your thought about dot notation vs. message notation for property accessing? Please try to keep it focused on Objective-C - my one bias I'll put forth is that Objective-C is Objective-C, so your preference that it be like Java or JavaScript aren't valid. Valid commentary is to do with technical issues (operation ordering, cast precedence, performance, etc), clarity (structure vs. object nature, both pro and con!), succinctness, etc. Note, I'm of the school of rigorous quality and readability in code having worked on huge projects where code convention and quality is paramount (the write once read a thousand times paradigm).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >