Search Results

Search found 11700 results on 468 pages for 'business crm erp it scm s'.

Page 205/468 | < Previous Page | 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212  | Next Page >

• The case of the phantom ADF developer (and other yarns)

  - by Chris Muir

  A few years of ADF experience means I see common mistakes made by different developers, some I regularly make myself.  This post is designed to assist beginners to Oracle JDeveloper Application Development Framework (ADF) avoid a common ADF pitfall, the case of the phantom ADF developer [add Scooby-Doo music here]. ADF Business Components - triggers, default table values and instead of views. Oracle's JDeveloper tutorials help with the A-B-Cs of ADF development, typically built on the nice 'n safe demo schema provided by with the Oracle database such as the HR demo schema. However it's not too long until ADF beginners, having built up some confidence from learning with the tutorials and vanilla demo schemas, start building ADF Business Components based upon their own existing database schema objects.  This is where unexpected problems can sneak in. The crime Developers may encounter a surprising error at runtime when editing a record they just created or updated and committed to the database, based on their own existing tables, namely the error: JBO-25014: Another user has changed the row with primary key oracle.jbo.Key[x] ...where X is the primary key value of the row at hand.  In a production environment with multiple users this error may be legit, one of the other users has updated the row since you queried it.  Yet in a development environment this error is just plain confusing.  If developers are isolated in their own database, creating and editing records they know other users can't possibly be working with, or all the other developers have gone home for the day, how is this error possible? There are no other users?  It must be the phantom ADF developer! [insert dramatic music here] The following picture is what you'll see in the Business Component Browser, and you'll receive a similar error message via an ADF Faces page: A false conclusion What can possibly cause this issue if it isn't our phantom ADF developer?  Doesn't ADF BC implement record locking, locking database records when the row is modified in the ADF middle-tier by a user?  How can our phantom ADF developer even take out a lock if this is the case?  Maybe ADF has a bug, maybe ADF isn't implementing record locking at all?  Shouldn't we see the error "JBO-26030: Failed to lock the record, another user holds the lock" as we attempt to modify the record, why do we see JBO-25014? : Let's verify that ADF is in fact issuing the correct SQL LOCK-FOR-UPDATE statement to the database. First we need to verify ADF's locking strategy.  It is determined by the Application Module's jbo.locking.mode property.  The default (as of JDev 11.1.1.4.0 if memory serves me correct) and recommended value is optimistic, and the other valid value is pessimistic. Next we need a mechanism to check that ADF is issuing the LOCK statements to the database.  We could ask DBAs to monitor locks with OEM, but optimally we'd rather not involve overworked DBAs in this process, so instead we can use the ADF runtime setting –Djbo.debugoutput=console.  At runtime this options turns on instrumentation within the ADF BC layer, which among a lot of extra detail displayed in the log window, will show the actual SQL statement issued to the database, including the LOCK statement we're looking to confirm. Setting our locking mode to pessimistic, opening the Business Components Browser of a JSF page allowing us to edit a record, say the CHARGEABLE field within a BOOKINGS record where BOOKING_NO = 1206, upon editing the record see among others the following log entries: [421] Built select: 'SELECT BOOKING_NO, EVENT_NO, RESOURCE_CODE, CHARGEABLE, MADE_BY, QUANTITY, COST, STATUS, COMMENTS FROM BOOKINGS Bookings'[422] Executing LOCK...SELECT BOOKING_NO, EVENT_NO, RESOURCE_CODE, CHARGEABLE, MADE_BY, QUANTITY, COST, STATUS, COMMENTS FROM BOOKINGS Bookings WHERE BOOKING_NO=:1 FOR UPDATE NOWAIT[423] Where binding param 1: 1206  As can be seen on line 422, in fact a LOCK-FOR-UPDATE is indeed issued to the database.  Later when we commit the record we see: [441] OracleSQLBuilder: SAVEPOINT 'BO_SP'[442] OracleSQLBuilder Executing, Lock 1 DML on: BOOKINGS (Update)[443] UPDATE buf Bookings>#u SQLStmtBufLen: 210, actual=62[444] UPDATE BOOKINGS Bookings SET CHARGEABLE=:1 WHERE BOOKING_NO=:2[445] Update binding param 1: N[446] Where binding param 2: 1206[447] BookingsView1 notify COMMIT ... [448] _LOCAL_VIEW_USAGE_model_Bookings_ResourceTypesView1 notify COMMIT ... [449] EntityCache close prepared statement ....and as a result the changes are saved to the database, and the lock is released. Let's see what happens when we use the optimistic locking mode, this time to change the same BOOKINGS record CHARGEABLE column again.  As soon as we edit the record we see little activity in the logs, nothing to indicate any SQL statement, let alone a LOCK has been taken out on the row. However when we save our records by issuing a commit, the following is recorded in the logs: [509] OracleSQLBuilder: SAVEPOINT 'BO_SP'[510] OracleSQLBuilder Executing doEntitySelect on: BOOKINGS (true)[511] Built select: 'SELECT BOOKING_NO, EVENT_NO, RESOURCE_CODE, CHARGEABLE, MADE_BY, QUANTITY, COST, STATUS, COMMENTS FROM BOOKINGS Bookings'[512] Executing LOCK...SELECT BOOKING_NO, EVENT_NO, RESOURCE_CODE, CHARGEABLE, MADE_BY, QUANTITY, COST, STATUS, COMMENTS FROM BOOKINGS Bookings WHERE BOOKING_NO=:1 FOR UPDATE NOWAIT[513] Where binding param 1: 1205[514] OracleSQLBuilder Executing, Lock 2 DML on: BOOKINGS (Update)[515] UPDATE buf Bookings>#u SQLStmtBufLen: 210, actual=62[516] UPDATE BOOKINGS Bookings SET CHARGEABLE=:1 WHERE BOOKING_NO=:2[517] Update binding param 1: Y[518] Where binding param 2: 1205[519] BookingsView1 notify COMMIT ... [520] _LOCAL_VIEW_USAGE_model_Bookings_ResourceTypesView1 notify COMMIT ... [521] EntityCache close prepared statement Again even though we're seeing the midtier delay the LOCK statement until commit time, it is in fact occurring on line 412, and released as part of the commit issued on line 419.  Therefore with either optimistic or pessimistic locking a lock is indeed issued. Our conclusion at this point must be, unless there's the unlikely cause the LOCK statement is never really hitting the database, or the even less likely cause the database has a bug, then ADF does in fact take out a lock on the record before allowing the current user to update it.  So there's no way our phantom ADF developer could even modify the record if he tried without at least someone receiving a lock error. Hmm, we can only conclude the locking mode is a red herring and not the true cause of our problem.  Who is the phantom? At this point we'll need to conclude that the error message "JBO-25014: Another user has changed" is somehow legit, even though we don't understand yet what's causing it. This leads onto two further questions, how does ADF know another user has changed the row, and what's been changed anyway? To answer the first question, how does ADF know another user has changed the row, the Fusion Guide's section 4.10.11 How to Protect Against Losing Simultaneous Updated Data , that details the Entity Object Change-Indicator property, gives us the answer: At runtime the framework provides automatic "lost update" detection for entity objects to ensure that a user cannot unknowingly modify data that another user has updated and committed in the meantime. Typically, this check is performed by comparing the original values of each persistent entity attribute against the corresponding current column values in the database at the time the underlying row is locked. Before updating a row, the entity object verifies that the row to be updated is still consistent with the current state of the database.  The guide further suggests to make this solution more efficient: You can make the lost update detection more efficient by identifying any attributes of your entity whose values you know will be updated whenever the entity is modified. Typical candidates include a version number column or an updated date column in the row.....To detect whether the row has been modified since the user queried it in the most efficient way, select the Change Indicator option to compare only the change-indicator attribute values. We now know that ADF BC doesn't use the locking mechanism at all to protect the current user against updates, but rather it keeps a copy of the original record fetched, separate to the user changed version of the record, and it compares the original record against the one in the database when the lock is taken out.  If values don't match, be it the default compare-all-columns behaviour, or the more efficient Change Indicator mechanism, ADF BC will throw the JBO-25014 error. This leaves one last question.  Now we know the mechanism under which ADF identifies a changed row, what we don't know is what's changed and who changed it? The real culprit What's changed?  We know the record in the mid-tier has been changed by the user, however ADF doesn't use the changed record in the mid-tier to compare to the database record, but rather a copy of the original record before it was changed.  This leaves us to conclude the database record has changed, but how and by who? There are three potential causes: Database triggers The database trigger among other uses, can be configured to fire PLSQL code on a database table insert, update or delete.  In particular in an insert or update the trigger can override the value assigned to a particular column.  The trigger execution is actioned by the database on behalf of the user initiating the insert or update action. Why this causes the issue specific to our ADF use, is when we insert or update a record in the database via ADF, ADF keeps a copy of the record written to the database.  However the cached record is instantly out of date as the database triggers have modified the record that was actually written to the database.  Thus when we update the record we just inserted or updated for a second time to the database, ADF compares its original copy of the record to that in the database, and it detects the record has been changed – giving us JBO-25014. This is probably the most common cause of this problem. Default values A second reason this issue can occur is another database feature, default column values.  When creating a database table the schema designer can define default values for specific columns.  For example a CREATED_BY column could be set to SYSDATE, or a flag column to Y or N.  Default values are only used by the database when a user inserts a new record and the specific column is assigned NULL.  The database in this case will overwrite the column with the default value. As per the database trigger section, it then becomes apparent why ADF chokes on this feature, though it can only specifically occur in an insert-commit-update-commit scenario, not the update-commit-update-commit scenario. Instead of trigger views I must admit I haven't double checked this scenario but it seems plausible, that of the Oracle database's instead of trigger view (sometimes referred to as instead of views).  A view in the database is based on a query, and dependent on the queries complexity, may support insert, update and delete functionality to a limited degree.  In order to support fully insertable, updateable and deletable views, Oracle introduced the instead of view, that gives the view designer the ability to not only define the view query, but a set of programmatic PLSQL triggers where the developer can define their own logic for inserts, updates and deletes. While this provides the database programmer a very powerful feature, it can cause issues for our ADF application.  On inserting or updating a record in the instead of view, the record and it's data that goes in is not necessarily the data that comes out when ADF compares the records, as the view developer has the option to practically do anything with the incoming data, including throwing it away or pushing it to tables which aren't used by the view underlying query for fetching the data. Readers are at this point reminded that this article is specifically about how the JBO-25014 error occurs in the context of 1 developer on an isolated database.  The article is not considering how the error occurs in a production environment where there are multiple users who can cause this error in a legitimate fashion.  Assuming none of the above features are the cause of the problem, and optimistic locking is turned on (this error is not possible if pessimistic locking is the default mode *and* none of the previous causes are possible), JBO-25014 is quite feasible in a production ADF application if 2 users modify the same record. At this point under project timelines pressure, the obvious fix for developers is to drop both database triggers and default values from the underlying tables.  However we must be careful that these legacy constructs aren't used and assumed to be in place by other legacy systems.  Dropping the database triggers or default value that the existing Oracle Forms  applications assumes and requires to be in place could cause unexpected behaviour and bugs in the Forms application.  Proficient software engineers would recognize such a change may require a partial or full regression test of the existing legacy system, a potentially costly and timely exercise, not ideal. Solving the mystery once and for all Luckily ADF has built in functionality to deal with this issue, though it's not a surprise, as Oracle as the author of ADF also built the database, and are fully aware of the Oracle database's feature set.  At the Entity Object attribute level, the Refresh After Insert and Refresh After Update properties.  Simply selecting these instructs ADF BC after inserting or updating a record to the database, to expect the database to modify the said attributes, and read a copy of the changed attributes back into its cached mid-tier record.  Thus next time the developer modifies the current record, the comparison between the mid-tier record and the database record match, and JBO-25014: Another user has changed" is no longer an issue. [Post edit - as per the comment from Oracle's Steven Davelaar below, as he correctly points out the above solution will not work for instead-of-triggers views as it relies on SQL RETURNING clause which is incompatible with this type of view] Alternatively you can set the Change Indicator on one of the attributes.  This will work as long as the relating column for the attribute in the database itself isn't inadvertently updated.  In turn you're possibly just masking the issue rather than solving it, because if another developer turns the Change Indicator back on the original issue will return.

  Read the article

• Understanding the value of Customer Experience & Loyalty for the Telecommunications Industry

  - by raul.goycoolea

  Worried by economic woes and market forces, especially in mature markets, communications service providers (CSPs) increasingly focus on improving customer experience. In fact, it seems difficult to find a major message by a C-level executive in the developed world that does not include something on "meeting and exceeding customers' needs". Frequently in customer satisfaction studies by prominent firms, CSPs fall short of the leadership demonstrated by other industries that take customer-centric approaches to their bottom-line strategies. Consider the following:Despite the continued impact of global economic crisis, in July 2010, Apple Computer posted record revenue and net quarterly profit. Those who attribute the results primarily to the iPhone 4 launch should note that Apple also shipped around 30% more Macintosh computers than the same period the previous year. Even sales of the iPod line increased by 8% in a highly commoditized, shrinking media player market. Finally, Apple began selling iPads during the quarter, with total sales of more than 3 million units. What does Apple have that the others lack? Well, some great products (and services) to be sure, but it also excels at customer service and support, marketing, and distribution, and has one of the strongest brands globally. Its products are useful, simple to use, easy to acquire and augment, high quality, and considered very cool. They also evoke such an emotional response from many of Apple's customers, which they turn up their noses at competitive products.In other words, Apple appears to have mastered virtually every aspect of customer experience and the resultant loyalty of its customer base - even in difficult financial times. Through that unwavering customer focus, Apple continues to drive its revenues and profits to new heights. Other customer loyalty leaders like Wal-Mart, Google, Toyota and Honda are also doing well by focusing on customer experience as an essential driver of profitability. Service providers should note this performance and ask themselves how they might leverage the same principles to increase their own profitability. After all, that is what customer experience and loyalty are all about: profitability.To successfully manage all the critical touch points of customer experience, CSPs must shun the one-size-fits-all approach. They can no longer afford to view customer service fundamentally as an act of altruism - which mentality dates back to the industry's civil service days, when CSPs were typically government organizations that were critical to economic development and public safety.As regulators and public officials have pushed, and continue to push, service providers to new heights of reliability - using incentives and punishments - most CSPs already have some of the fundamental building blocks of customer service in place. Yet despite that history and experience, service providers still lag other industries in providing what is seen as good customer service.As we observed in the TMF's 2009 Insights Research report, Customer Experience Management: Driving Loyalty & Profitability there has been resurgence in interest by CSPs. More and more of them have stated ambitions to catch up other industries, and they are realizing that good customer service is a powerful strategy for increasing business performance and profitability, not an act of good will.CSPs are recognizing the connection between customer experience and profitability, as demonstrated in many studies. For example, according to research by Bain & Company, a 5 percent improvement in customer retention rates can yield as much as a 75 percent increase in profits for companies across a range of industries.After decades of customer experience strategy formulation, Bain partner and business author, Frederick Reichheld, considers "would you recommend us to a friend?" as the ultimate question for a customer. How many times have you or your friends recommended an iPod, iPhone or a Mac? What do your children recommend to their peers? Their peers to them?There are certain steps service providers have to take to create more personalized relationships with their customers, as well as reduce churn and increase profitability, all while becoming leaner and more agile. First, they have to define customer experience, we define it as the result of the sum of observations, perceptions, thoughts and feelings arising from interactions and relationships between customers and their service provider(s). Virtually every customer touch point - whether directly or indirectly linked to service providers and their partners - contributes to customer perception, satisfaction, loyalty, and ultimately profitability. Gaining leadership in customer experience and satisfaction will not be a simple task, as it is affected by virtually every customer-facing aspect of the service provider, and in turn impacts the service provider deeply - especially on the all-important bottom line. The scope of issues affecting customer experience is complex and dynamic.With new services, devices and applications extending the basis of customer experience to domains beyond the direct control of the service provider, it is likely to increase in complexity and dynamism.Customer loyalty = increased profitsAs stated earlier, customer experience programs are not fundamentally altruistic exercises, but a strategic means of improving competitiveness and profitability in the short and long term. Loyalty is essential to deriving long term profits from customers.Some of the earliest loyalty programs date back to the 1930s, when packaged goods companies offered embedded coupons for rewards to buyers, and eventually retail chains began offering reward programs to frequent shoppers. These programs continued for decades but were leapfrogged in the 1980s by more aggressive programs from the airlines.This movement was led by American Airlines, which launched the first full-scale loyalty marketing program of the modern era with the AAdvantage frequent flyer scheme. It was the first to reward frequent fliers with notional air miles that could be accumulated and later redeemed for free travel. Figure 1: Opportunities example of Customer loyalty driven profitOther airlines and travel providers were quick to grasp the incredible value of providing customers with an incentive to use their company exclusively. Within a few years, dozens of travel industry companies launched similar initiatives and now loyalty programs are achieving near-ubiquity in many service industries, especially those in which it is difficult to differentiate offerings by product attributes.The belief is that increased profitability will result from customer retention efforts because:•    The cost of acquisition occurs only at the beginning of a relationship: the longer the relationship, the lower the amortized cost;•    Account maintenance costs decline as a percentage of total costs, or as a percentage of revenue, over the lifetime of the relationship;•    Long term customers tend to be less inclined to switch and less price sensitive which can result in stable unit sales volume and increases in dollar-sales volume;•    Long term customers may initiate word-of-mouth promotions and referrals, which cost the company nothing and arguably are the most effective form of advertising;•    Long-term customers are more likely to buy ancillary products and higher margin supplemental products;•    Long term customers tend to be satisfied with their relationship with the company and are less likely to switch to competitors, making market entry or competitors gaining market share difficult;•    Regular customers tend to be less expensive to service, as they are familiar with the processes involved, require less 'education', and are consistent in their order placement;•    Increased customer retention and loyalty makes the employees' jobs easier and more satisfying. In turn, happy employees feed back into higher customer satisfaction in a virtuous circle. Figure 2: The virtuous circle of customer loyaltyFigure 2 represents a high-level example of a virtuous cycle driven by customer satisfaction and loyalty, depicting how superiority in product and service offerings, as well as strong customer support by competent employees, lead to higher sales and ultimately profitability. As stated above, this is not a new concept, but succeeding with it is difficult. It has eluded many a company driven to achieve profitability goals. Of course, for this circle to be virtuous, the customer relationship(s) must be profitable.Trying to maintain the loyalty of unprofitable customers is not a viable business strategy. It is, therefore, important that marketers can assess the profitability of each customer (or customer segment), and either improve or terminate relationships that are not profitable. This means each customer's 'relationship costs' must be understood and compared to their 'relationship revenue'. Customer lifetime value (CLV) is the most commonly used metric here, as it is generally accepted as a representation of exactly how much each customer is worth in monetary terms, and therefore a determinant of exactly how much a service provider should be willing to spend to acquire or retain that customer.CLV models make several simplifying assumptions and often involve the following inputs:•    Churn rate represents the percentage of customers who end their relationship with a company in a given period;•    Retention rate is calculated by subtracting the churn rate percentage from 100;•    Period/horizon equates to the units of time into which a customer relationship can be divided for analysis. A year is the most commonly used period for this purpose. Customer lifetime value is a multi-period calculation, often projecting three to seven years into the future. In practice, analysis beyond this point is viewed as too speculative to be reliable. The model horizon is the number of periods used in the calculation;•    Periodic revenue is the amount of revenue collected from a customer in a given period (though this is often extended across multiple periods into the future to understand lifetime value), such as usage revenue, revenues anticipated from cross and upselling, and often some weighting for referrals by a loyal customer to others; •    Retention cost describes the amount of money the service provider must spend, in a given period, to retain an existing customer. Again, this is often forecast across multiple periods. Retention costs include customer support, billing, promotional incentives and so on;•    Discount rate means the cost of capital used to discount future revenue from a customer. Discounting is an advanced method used in more sophisticated CLV calculations;•    Profit margin is the projected profit as a percentage of revenue for the period. This may be reflected as a percentage of gross or net profit. Again, this is generally projected across the model horizon to understand lifetime value.A strong focus on managing these inputs can help service providers realize stronger customer relationships and profits, but there are some obstacles to overcome in achieving accurate calculations of CLV, such as the complexity of allocating costs across the customer base. There are many costs that serve all customers which must be properly allocated across the base, and often a simple proportional allocation across the whole base or a segment may not accurately reflect the true cost of serving that customer;  This is made worse by the fragmentation of customer information, which is likely to be across a variety of product or operations groups, and may be difficult to aggregate due to different representations.In addition, there is the complexity of account relationships and structures to take into consideration. Complex account structures may not be understood or properly represented. For example, a profitable customer may have a separate account for a second home or another family member, which may appear to be unprofitable. If the service provider cannot relate the two accounts, CLV is not properly represented and any resultant cancellation of the apparently unprofitable account may result in the customer churning from the profitable one.In summary, if service providers are to realize strong customer relationships and their attendant profits, there must be a very strong focus on data management. This needs to be coupled with analytics that help business managers and those who work in customer-facing functions offer highly personalized solutions to customers, while maintaining profitability for the service provider. It's clear that acquiring new customers is expensive. Advertising costs, campaign management expenses, promotional service pricing and discounting, and equipment subsidies make a serious dent in a new customer's profitability. That is especially true given the rising subsidies for Smartphone users, which service providers hope will result in greater profits from profits from data services profitability in future.  The situation is made worse by falling prices and greater competition in mature markets.Customer acquisition through industry consolidation isn't cheap either. A North American service provider spent about $2,000 per subscriber in its acquisition of a smaller company earlier this year. While this has allowed it to leapfrog to become the largest mobile service provider in the country, it required a total investment of more than $28 billion (including assumption of the acquiree's debt).While many operating cost synergies clearly made this deal more attractive to the acquiring company, this is certainly an expensive way to acquire customers: the cost per subscriber in this case is not out of line with the prices others have paid for acquisitions.While growth by acquisition certainly increases overall revenues, it often creates tremendous challenges for profitability. Organic growth through increased customer loyalty and retention is a more effective driver of profit, as well as a stronger predictor of future profitability. Service providers, especially those in mature markets, are increasingly recognizing this and taking steps toward a creating a more personalized, flexible and satisfying experience for their customers.In summary, the clearest path to profitability for companies in virtually all industries is through customer retention and maximization of lifetime value. Service providers would do well to recognize this and focus attention on profitable customer relationships.

  Read the article

• Latest additions to Certify

  - by SadFab

  New releases added: FMW, OBIEE, OIAM, OFR, ODI, GOLDENGATE Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} FMW 11.1.1.6.0 o   Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3.5.0.0 o   Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3.6.0.0 o   Oracle HTTP Server o   Oracle Web Cache o   Oracle Application Development Framework o   Oracle Application Development Runtime o   Oracle SOA Suite o   Oracle Application Integration Architecture Foundation Pack o   Oracle B2B o   Oracle BPEL Process Manager o   Oracle Business Activity Monitoring o   Oracle Business Process Management o   Oracle Complex Event Processing o   Oracle Enterprise Repository o   Oracle Mediator o   Oracle Service Bus o   Oracle Internet Directory o   Oracle Virtual Directory o   Oracle Identity Federation o   Oracle Directory Services Manager o   Oracle Authentication Services for OS o   Oracle Portal o   Oracle WebCenter Portal o   Oracle Reports o   Reports Builder o   Oracle Forms o   Forms Builder o   Discoverer Administrator o   Discoverer Desktop Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} o   ECM certifications (renamed Oracle WebCenter Content o   WebCenter Sites (formerly Fatwire) Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} OBIEE 11.1.1.6.0 o   Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition o   Oracle Business Intelligence Publisher o   Oracle Real-Time Decisions o   Oracle Segmentation Server Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}  Oracle Identity & Access Management 11.1.1.5.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 o   Oracle Access Manager o   Oracle Adaptive Access Manager o   Oracle Authorization Policy Manager o   Oracle Entitlements Server o   Oracle Identity Manager o   Oracle Identity Navigator o   Oracle Security Token Service Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} Oracle Identity & Access Management 11.1.2.0.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 o   Oracle Access Manager o   Oracle Adaptive Access Manager o   Oracle Authorization Policy Manager o   Oracle Enterprise Single Sign On Suite o   Oracle Entitlements Server o   Oracle Identity Connect o   Oracle Identity Federation o   Oracle Identity Manager o   Oracle Identity Navigator o   Oracle Privileged Account Manager o   Oracle Security Token Service o   Oracle Unified Directory Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} OFR 11.1.2.0.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 o   Oracle Forms o   Oracle Reports Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} ODI 11.1.1.6.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 o   Oracle Data Integrator Agent o   Oracle Data Integrator Console o   Oracle Data Integrator Studio Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} OGG 11.1.1.1.2 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} o   Oracle GoldenGate o   Oracle GoldenGate Adapters for Java and Flat File o   Oracle GoldenGate for Base24 3.0.6 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} OGG 11.2.1.0.1 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} o   Oracle GoldenGate

  Read the article

• Selling Federal Enterprise Architecture (EA)

  - by TedMcLaughlan

  Selling Federal Enterprise Architecture A taxonomy of subject areas, from which to develop a prioritized marketing and communications plan to evangelize EA activities within and among US Federal Government organizations and constituents. Any and all feedback is appreciated, particularly in developing and extending this discussion as a tool for use – more information and details are also available. "Selling" the discipline of Enterprise Architecture (EA) in the Federal Government (particularly in non-DoD agencies) is difficult, notwithstanding the general availability and use of the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) for some time now, and the relatively mature use of the reference models in the OMB Capital Planning and Investment (CPIC) cycles. EA in the Federal Government also tends to be a very esoteric and hard to decipher conversation – early apologies to those who agree to continue reading this somewhat lengthy article. Alignment to the FEAF and OMB compliance mandates is long underway across the Federal Departments and Agencies (and visible via tools like PortfolioStat and ITDashboard.gov – but there is still a gap between the top-down compliance directives and enablement programs, and the bottom-up awareness and effective use of EA for either IT investment management or actual mission effectiveness. "EA isn't getting deep enough penetration into programs, components, sub-agencies, etc.", verified a panelist at the most recent EA Government Conference in DC. Newer guidance from OMB may be especially difficult to handle, where bottom-up input can't be accurately aligned, analyzed and reported via standardized EA discipline at the Agency level – for example in addressing the new (for FY13) Exhibit 53D "Agency IT Reductions and Reinvestments" and the information required for "Cloud Computing Alternatives Evaluation" (supporting the new Exhibit 53C, "Agency Cloud Computing Portfolio"). Therefore, EA must be "sold" directly to the communities that matter, from a coordinated, proactive messaging perspective that takes BOTH the Program-level value drivers AND the broader Agency mission and IT maturity context into consideration. Selling EA means persuading others to take additional time and possibly assign additional resources, for a mix of direct and indirect benefits – many of which aren't likely to be realized in the short-term. This means there's probably little current, allocated budget to work with; ergo the challenge of trying to sell an "unfunded mandate". Also, the concept of "Enterprise" in large Departments like Homeland Security tends to cross all kinds of organizational boundaries – as Richard Spires recently indicated by commenting that "...organizational boundaries still trump functional similarities. Most people understand what we're trying to do internally, and at a high level they get it. The problem, of course, is when you get down to them and their system and the fact that you're going to be touching them...there's always that fear factor," Spires said. It is quite clear to the Federal IT Investment community that for EA to meet its objective, understandable, relevant value must be measured and reported using a repeatable method – as described by GAO's recent report "Enterprise Architecture Value Needs To Be Measured and Reported". What's not clear is the method or guidance to sell this value. In fact, the current GAO "Framework for Assessing and Improving Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0)", a.k.a. the "EAMMF", does not include words like "sell", "persuade", "market", etc., except in reference ("within Core Element 19: Organization business owner and CXO representatives are actively engaged in architecture development") to a brief section in the CIO Council's 2001 "Practical Guide to Federal Enterprise Architecture", entitled "3.3.1. Develop an EA Marketing Strategy and Communications Plan." Furthermore, Core Element 19 of the EAMMF is advised to be applied in "Stage 3: Developing Initial EA Versions". This kind of EA sales campaign truly should start much earlier in the maturity progress, i.e. in Stages 0 or 1. So, what are the understandable, relevant benefits (or value) to sell, that can find an agreeable, participatory audience, and can pave the way towards success of a longer-term, funded set of EA mechanisms that can be methodically measured and reported? Pragmatic benefits from a useful EA that can help overcome the fear of change? And how should they be sold? Following is a brief taxonomy (it's a taxonomy, to help organize SME support) of benefit-related subjects that might make the most sense, in creating the messages and organizing an initial "engagement plan" for evangelizing EA "from within". An EA "Sales Taxonomy" of sorts. We're not boiling the ocean here; the subjects that are included are ones that currently appear to be urgently relevant to the current Federal IT Investment landscape. Note that successful dialogue in these topics is directly usable as input or guidance for actually developing early-stage, "Fit-for-Purpose" (a DoDAF term) Enterprise Architecture artifacts, as prescribed by common methods found in most EA methodologies, including FEAF, TOGAF, DoDAF and our own Oracle Enterprise Architecture Framework (OEAF). The taxonomy below is organized by (1) Target Community, (2) Benefit or Value, and (3) EA Program Facet - as in: "Let's talk to (1: Community Member) about how and why (3: EA Facet) the EA program can help with (2: Benefit/Value)". Once the initial discussion targets and subjects are approved (that can be measured and reported), a "marketing and communications plan" can be created. A working example follows the Taxonomy. Enterprise Architecture Sales Taxonomy Draft, Summary Version 1. Community 1.1. Budgeted Programs or Portfolios Communities of Purpose (CoPR) 1.1.1. Program/System Owners (Senior Execs) Creating or Executing Acquisition Plans 1.1.2. Program/System Owners Facing Strategic Change 1.1.2.1. Mandated 1.1.2.2. Expected/Anticipated 1.1.3. Program Managers - Creating Employee Performance Plans 1.1.4. CO/COTRs – Creating Contractor Performance Plans, or evaluating Value Engineering Change Proposals (VECP) 1.2. Governance & Communications Communities of Practice (CoP) 1.2.1. Policy Owners 1.2.1.1. OCFO 1.2.1.1.1. Budget/Procurement Office 1.2.1.1.2. Strategic Planning 1.2.1.2. OCIO 1.2.1.2.1. IT Management 1.2.1.2.2. IT Operations 1.2.1.2.3. Information Assurance (Cyber Security) 1.2.1.2.4. IT Innovation 1.2.1.3. Information-Sharing/ Process Collaboration (i.e. policies and procedures regarding Partners, Agreements) 1.2.2. Governing IT Council/SME Peers (i.e. an "Architects Council") 1.2.2.1. Enterprise Architects (assumes others exist; also assumes EA participants aren't buried solely within the CIO shop) 1.2.2.2. Domain, Enclave, Segment Architects – i.e. the right affinity group for a "shared services" EA structure (per the EAMMF), which may be classified as Federated, Segmented, Service-Oriented, or Extended 1.2.2.3. External Oversight/Constraints 1.2.2.3.1. GAO/OIG & Legal 1.2.2.3.2. Industry Standards 1.2.2.3.3. Official public notification, response 1.2.3. Mission Constituents Participant & Analyst Community of Interest (CoI) 1.2.3.1. Mission Operators/Users 1.2.3.2. Public Constituents 1.2.3.3. Industry Advisory Groups, Stakeholders 1.2.3.4. Media 2. Benefit/Value (Note the actual benefits may not be discretely attributable to EA alone; EA is a very collaborative, cross-cutting discipline.) 2.1. Program Costs – EA enables sound decisions regarding... 2.1.1. Cost Avoidance – a TCO theme 2.1.2. Sequencing – alignment of capability delivery 2.1.3. Budget Instability – a Federal reality 2.2. Investment Capital – EA illuminates new investment resources via... 2.2.1. Value Engineering – contractor-driven cost savings on existing budgets, direct or collateral 2.2.2. Reuse – reuse of investments between programs can result in savings, chargeback models; avoiding duplication 2.2.3. License Refactoring – IT license & support models may not reflect actual or intended usage 2.3. Contextual Knowledge – EA enables informed decisions by revealing... 2.3.1. Common Operating Picture (COP) – i.e. cross-program impacts and synergy, relative to context 2.3.2. Expertise & Skill – who truly should be involved in architectural decisions, both business and IT 2.3.3. Influence – the impact of politics and relationships can be examined 2.3.4. Disruptive Technologies – new technologies may reduce costs or mitigate risk in unanticipated ways 2.3.5. What-If Scenarios – can become much more refined, current, verifiable; basis for Target Architectures 2.4. Mission Performance – EA enables beneficial decision results regarding... 2.4.1. IT Performance and Optimization – towards 100% effective, available resource utilization 2.4.2. IT Stability – towards 100%, real-time uptime 2.4.3. Agility – responding to rapid changes in mission 2.4.4. Outcomes –measures of mission success, KPIs – vs. only "Outputs" 2.4.5. Constraints – appropriate response to constraints 2.4.6. Personnel Performance – better line-of-sight through performance plans to mission outcome 2.5. Mission Risk Mitigation – EA mitigates decision risks in terms of... 2.5.1. Compliance – all the right boxes are checked 2.5.2. Dependencies –cross-agency, segment, government 2.5.3. Transparency – risks, impact and resource utilization are illuminated quickly, comprehensively 2.5.4. Threats and Vulnerabilities – current, realistic awareness and profiles 2.5.5. Consequences – realization of risk can be mapped as a series of consequences, from earlier decisions or new decisions required for current issues 2.5.5.1. Unanticipated – illuminating signals of future or non-symmetric risk; helping to "future-proof" 2.5.5.2. Anticipated – discovering the level of impact that matters 3. EA Program Facet (What parts of the EA can and should be communicated, using business or mission terms?) 3.1. Architecture Models – the visual tools to be created and used 3.1.1. Operating Architecture – the Business Operating Model/Architecture elements of the EA truly drive all other elements, plus expose communication channels 3.1.2. Use Of – how can the EA models be used, and how are they populated, from a reasonable, pragmatic yet compliant perspective? What are the core/minimal models required? What's the relationship of these models, with existing system models? 3.1.3. Scope – what level of granularity within the models, and what level of abstraction across the models, is likely to be most effective and useful? 3.2. Traceability – the maturity, status, completeness of the tools 3.2.1. Status – what in fact is the degree of maturity across the integrated EA model and other relevant governance models, and who may already be benefiting from it? 3.2.2. Visibility – how does the EA visibly and effectively prove IT investment performance goals are being reached, with positive mission outcome? 3.3. Governance – what's the interaction, participation method; how are the tools used? 3.3.1. Contributions – how is the EA program informed, accept submissions, collect data? Who are the experts? 3.3.2. Review – how is the EA validated, against what criteria?  Taxonomy Usage Example:   1. To speak with: a. ...a particular set of System Owners Facing Strategic Change, via mandate (like the "Cloud First" mandate); about... b. ...how the EA program's visible and easily accessible Infrastructure Reference Model (i.e. "IRM" or "TRM"), if updated more completely with current system data, can... c. ...help shed light on ways to mitigate risks and avoid future costs associated with NOT leveraging potentially-available shared services across the enterprise... 2. ....the following Marketing & Communications (Sales) Plan can be constructed: a. Create an easy-to-read "Consequence Model" that illustrates how adoption of a cloud capability (like elastic operational storage) can enable rapid and durable compliance with the mandate – using EA traceability. Traceability might be from the IRM to the ARM (that identifies reusable services invoking the elastic storage), and then to the PRM with performance measures (such as % utilization of purchased storage allocation) included in the OMB Exhibits; and b. Schedule a meeting with the Program Owners, timed during their Acquisition Strategy meetings in response to the mandate, to use the "Consequence Model" for advising them to organize a rapid and relevant RFI solicitation for this cloud capability (regarding alternatives for sourcing elastic operational storage); and c. Schedule a series of short "Discovery" meetings with the system architecture leads (as agreed by the Program Owners), to further populate/validate the "As-Is" models and frame the "To Be" models (via scenarios), to better inform the RFI, obtain the best feedback from the vendor community, and provide potential value for and avoid impact to all other programs and systems. --end example -- Note that communications with the intended audience should take a page out of the standard "Search Engine Optimization" (SEO) playbook, using keywords and phrases relating to "value" and "outcome" vs. "compliance" and "output". Searches in email boxes, internal and external search engines for phrases like "cost avoidance strategies", "mission performance metrics" and "innovation funding" should yield messages and content from the EA team. This targeted, informed, practical sales approach should result in additional buy-in and participation, additional EA information contribution and model validation, development of more SMEs and quick "proof points" (with real-life testing) to bolster the case for EA. The proof point here is a successful, timely procurement that satisfies not only the external mandate and external oversight review, but also meets internal EA compliance/conformance goals and therefore is more transparently useful across the community. In short, if sold effectively, the EA will perform and be recognized. EA won’t therefore be used only for compliance, but also (according to a validated, stated purpose) to directly influence decisions and outcomes. The opinions, views and analysis expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Oracle.

  Read the article

• json support in visual studio 2010

  - by jnsohnumr

  Hi, I'm trying to work on a new project parsing some JSON data for a Silverlight 4 project (specifically created as a "Silverlight Business Application - Visual C#" project) using C# in Visual Studio 2010, and I can't find how to include the references to have parsers and native object support for JSON data. As far as I know my development tools are up to date (checked MS update). I know that I can probably just write my own parser but that seems like re-inventing the wheel. Below are some lines that work in VS 2008 in another project of ours (can't post the files due to their being part of a business app): using System.Json; results = (JsonObject)JsonObject.Load(e.Result); I hope my description is adequate. Thanks for looking, jnsohnumr

  Read the article

• POCO Best Practice

  - by Paul Johnson

  All, I have a series of domain objects (project is NHibernate based). Currently as per 'good practice' they define only the business objects, comprising properties and methods specific to each objects function within the domain. However one of the objects has a requirement to send an SMTP message. I have a simple SMTP client class defined in a separate 'Utilities' assembly. In order to use this mail client from within the POCO, I would need to hold a reference to the utilities assembly in the domain. My query is this... Is it a departure from best practice to hold such a reference in a POCO, for the purpose of gaining necessary business functionality. Kind Regards Paul J.

  Read the article

• Integrating my website with BlogEngine.Net

  - by Kabeer

  Hello. I am developing a site (ASP.Net based) that, besides other features enables the users to blog as well. I am thinking of integrating BlogEngine.Net to my portal. From whatever little I have analyzed, integrating at presentation layer will be far more challenging in comparison to doing so at business layer. That means (I guess) I will have to use the BlogEngine.Core.dll in my application. I am looking for some sort of approval from the community, complimented with suggested do's and dont's. BTW, I find the business layer a bit intimidating (complex) as I want some basic & necessary features only.

  Read the article

• Search and display buisness locations on MKMapView

  - by jmurphy

  Hello, I'm trying to find a way to search for a business, such as "grocery stores" and display them on a google map around the users current location. This used to be pretty simple with the old URL style of launching the apple map location but I can't find out how to do it with the MKMapView. I understand that I'll need to use the MKAnnotations classes but my problem is with finding the data. I've tried plugging in the URL below to get the info from google but the size of the data seems way too large. http://maps.google.com/maps?q=grocery&mrt=yp&sll=37.769561,-122.412844&z=14&output=kml Is there an easy way to just set a property that tells the MKMapView to search for a keyword and display all matching business around my current location? Or does anybody know how to get this information from google?

  Read the article

• TransactionScope and Connection Pooling

  - by Graham

  Hi, I'm trying to get a handle on whether we have a problem in our application with database connections using incorrect IsolationLevels. Our application is a .Net 3.5 database app using SQL Server 2005. I've discovered that the IsolationLevel of connections are not reset when they are returned to the connection pool (see here) and was also really surprised to read in this blog post that each new TransactionScope created gets its own connection pool assigned to it. Our database updates (via our business objects) take place within a TransactionScope (a new one is created for each business object graph update). But our fetches do not use an explicit transaction. So what I'm wondering is could we ever get into the situation where our fetch operations (which should be using the default IsolationLevel - Read Committed) would reuse a connection from the pool which has been used for an update, and inherit the update IsolationLevel (RepeatableRead)? Or would our updates be guaranteed to use a different connection pool seeing as they are wrapped in a TransactionScope? Thanks in advance, Graham

  Read the article

• How To Update a Facebook App Page Status

  - by DigitalZombieKid

  Hi all, I've done a few searches and couldn't find an answer. I'm trying to update the status of my business's "Application Page" (not personal page, and not "Fan Page") on Facebook. Two questions for the community: 1) How to update the "Application Page" status programmatically? I found the answer for a "Fan Page" here (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2097665/authorizing-a-facebook-fan-page-for-status-updates). Does anyone think it will work for an "Application Page" as well? 2) How to update the "Application Page" status through a third party service? Ideally, I'd like to post to one location and have it show up a) on my business twitter status and b) on my Facebook "Application Page" status. Has anyone heard of a company that might be able to help me do this (paid or free)? Thanks and regards, DZK

  Read the article

• Designing a data model in VS2010 and generating ORM code, application

  - by Kay Zed

  Simply put: I have a database design in my head and I now want to use Visual Studio 2010 to create a WPF application. Key is to use the VS2010 tools to take much as possible manual work out of my hands. -The database engine is SQLite -ORM probably through DBLINQ -Use of LINQ -The application can create new, empty database instances -Easily maintainable (changes in data model possible) Q- How do I start designing the database model (visually) in Visual Studio 2010? Should this be an xsd? Do I do this in a separate project? Q- Next, how can I make the most use of VS2010 code generation tools to generate a business layer? Q- I suppose the business layer will be added as a Data Source (in another project?) and from there it's a rather generic data binding solution? I tried finding clear examples of this but it's a jungle out there, the hunt for a solution is NOT converging to one clear method.... :_(

  Read the article

• Sending persisted JDO instances over GWT-RPC

  - by Ben Daniel

  I've just started learning Google Web Toolkit and finished writing the Stock Watcher tutorial app. Is my thinking correct that if one wants to persist a business object (like a Stock) using JDO and send it back and forth to/from the client over RPC then one has to create two separate classes for that object: One with the JDO annotations for persisting it on the server and another which is serialisable and used over RPC? I notice the Stock Watcher has separate classes and I can theorise why: Otherwise the gwt compiler would try to generate javascript for everything the persisted class referenced like JDO and com.google.blah.users.User, etc Also there may be logic on the server-side class which doesn't apply to the client and vice-versa. I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. I don't want to have to create two versions of all my business object classes which I want to use over RPC if I don't have to.

  Read the article

• Hibernate: Parent/Child relationship in a single-table

  - by Dee

  I hardly see any pointer on the following problem related to Hibernate. This pertains to implementing inheritance using a single database table with a parent-child relationship to itself. For example: CREATE TABLE Employee ( empId BIGINT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, empName VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL, managerId BIGINT, CONSTRAINT pk_employee PRIMARY KEY (empId) ) Here, the managerId column may be null, or may point to another row of the Employee table. Business rule requires the Employee to know about all his reportees and for him to know about his/her manager. The business rules also allow rows to have null managerId (the CEO of the organisation doesn't have a manager). How do we map this relationship in Hibernate, standard many-to-one relationship doesn't work here? Example code would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Hibernate: Parent/Child relationship in a single-table

  - by Dee

  I hardly see any pointer on the following problem related to Hibernate. This pertains to implementing inheritance using a single database table with a parent-child relationship to itself. For example: CREATE TABLE Employee ( empId BIGINT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, empName VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL, managerId BIGINT, CONSTRAINT pk_employee PRIMARY KEY (empId) ) Here, the managerId column may be null, or may point to another row of the Employee table. Business rule requires the Employee to know about all his reportees and for him to know about his/her manager. The business rules also allow rows to have null managerId (the CEO of the organisation doesn't have a manager). How do we map this relationship in Hibernate, standard many-to-one relationship doesn't work here? Example code would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Best approach for authorisation rules

  - by Maciej

  I'm wonder about best approach of implementation auth. rules in Client-Server app using Business Objects. I've noticed common tactic is: - on DB side: implement one role for application, used for all app's users - definition users right and roles and assign users to proper group - Client side: add to Business Object's getters/setters rights checker allowing write / display data for particular user My concern is if this is really good approach from security perspective. It looks DB sends all information to Client, and then client's logic decide what to display or not. So, potentially advanced user can make query from their box and see/change anything. Isn't it?

  Read the article

• Best practices in ASP.Net code behind pages.

  - by patricks418

  Hi, I am an experienced developer but I am new to web application development. Now I am in charge of developing a new web application and I could really use some input from experienced web developers out there. I'd like to understand exactly what experienced web developers do in the code-behind pages. At first I thought it was best to have a rule that all the database access and business logic should be performed in classes external to the code-behind pages. My thought was that only logic necessary for the web form would be performed in the code-behind. I still think that all the business logic should be performed in other classes but I'm beginning to think it would be alright if the code-behind had access to the database to query it directly rather than having to call other classes to receive a dataset or collection back. Any input would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Ria Services vs WCF Dataservices

  - by NPehrsson

  My Team are evaluation to a bigger Business portal. (Invoicing, Bookkeeping, Salaries.....) We are all used to work with DDD, O/R mappers with NHibernate as our first choice. We have chosen to work with CompositeWPF to keep modularity between all modules and part system in the business portal. Now we have evaluated Ria Services and are kind of disappointed how it works in a Data Oriented way, Data Oriented can be good in a service oriented scenario, but we feel that we can with an Object Oriented approach to, and we feel that we can get an application with less complexity with the OO approach than the DO approach. For example it doesn't allow Value Objects, Many-to-many relations, everything needs to have keys and so on. We haven't looked at WCF Data Services yet so our question is WCF Data Services our answere? Does it integrate good with Silverlight 4? Can we work with it in a OO manor?

  Read the article

• Should an event-sourced aggregate root have query access to the event sourcing repository?

  - by JD Courtoy

  I'm working on an event-sourced CQRS implementation, using DDD in the application / domain layer. I have an object model that looks like this: public class Person : AggregateRootBase { private Guid? _bookingId; public Person(Identification identification) { Apply(new PersonCreatedEvent(identification)); } public Booking CreateBooking() { // Enforce Person invariants var booking = new Booking(); Apply(new PersonBookedEvent(booking.Id)); return booking; } public void Release() { // Enforce Person invariants // Should we load the booking here from the aggregate repository? // We need to ensure that booking is released as well. var booking = BookingRepository.Load(_bookingId); booking.Release(); Apply(new PersonReleasedEvent(_bookingId)); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(PersonBookedEvent @event) { _bookingId = @event.BookingId; } [EventHandler] public void Handle(PersonReleasedEvent @event) { _bookingId = null; } } public class Booking : AggregateRootBase { private DateTime _bookingDate; private DateTime? _releaseDate; public Booking() { //Enforce invariants Apply(new BookingCreatedEvent()); } public void Release() { //Enforce invariants Apply(new BookingReleasedEvent()); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(BookingCreatedEvent @event) { _bookingDate = SystemTime.Now(); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(BookingReleasedEvent @event) { _releaseDate = SystemTime.Now(); } // Some other business activities unrelated to a person } With my understanding of DDD so far, both Person and Booking are seperate aggregate roots for two reasons: There are times when business components will pull Booking objects separately from the database. (ie, a person that has been released has a previous booking modified due to incorrect information). There should not be locking contention between Person and Booking whenever a Booking needs to be updated. One other business requirement is that a Booking can never occur for a Person more than once at a time. Due to this, I'm concerned about querying the query database on the read side as there could potentially be some inconsistency there (due to using CQRS and having an eventually consistent read database). Should the aggregate roots be allowed to query the event-sourced backing store for objects (lazy-loading them as needed)? Are there any other avenues of implementation that would make more sense?

  Read the article

• How to fix issues when MSCRM Plugin Registration fails.

  - by Jeff Davis

  When you register a plug-in in Microsoft CRM all kinds of things can go wrong. Most commonly, the error I get is "An error occurred." When you look for more detail you just get: "Server was unable to process request" and under detail you see "An unexpected error occurred." Not very helpful. However, there are some good answers out there if you really dig. Anybody out there encountered this and how do you fix it?

  Read the article

• Account verification Yelp style, how is it more "secure" than traditional verification?

  - by Chad

  For business owners to "take control" of their business page on Yelp, they register for it. The Yelp system performs a telephone call-back. From watching to the video here, it sounds like a telephone version of what we all typically do - e-mail check. For e-mail check, it basically goes like this: User registers verify e-mail sent they click link inside verify e-mail site verifies Here's Yelp's: User registers verify screen shown with code Yelp calls user user enters code site verifies It's essentially the same thing, via phone. Is there any reason you can see why this method is better than the e-mail method?

  Read the article

• What's the best Communication Pattern for EJB3-based applications?

  - by Hank

  I'm starting a JEE project that needs to be strongly scalable. So far, the concept was: several Message Driven Beans, responsible for different parts of the architecture each MDB has a Session Bean injected, handling the business logic a couple of Entity Beans, providing access to the persistence layer communication between the different parts of the architecture via Request/Reply concept via JMS messages: MDB receives msg containing activity request uses its session bean to execute necessary business logic returns response object in msg to original requester The idea was that by de-coupling parts of the architecture from each other via the message bus, there is no limit to the scalability. Simply start more components - as long as they are connected to the same bus, we can grow and grow. Unfortunately, we're having massive problems with the request-reply concept. Transaction Mgmt seems to be in our way plenty. It seams that session beans are not supposed to consume messages?! Reading http://blogs.sun.com/fkieviet/entry/request_reply_from_an_ejb and http://forums.sun.com/message.jspa?messageID=10338789, I get the feeling that people actually recommend against the request/reply concept for EJBs. If that is the case, how do you communicate between your EJBs? (Remember, scalability is what I'm after) Details of my current setup: MDB 1 'TestController', uses (local) SLSB 1 'TestService' for business logic TestController.onMessage() makes TestService send a message to queue XYZ and requests a reply TestService uses Bean Managed Transactions TestService establishes a connection & session to the JMS broker via a joint connection factory upon initialization (@PostConstruct) TestService commits the transaction after sending, then begins another transaction and waits 10 sec for the response Message gets to MDB 2 'LocationController', which uses (local) SLSB 2 'LocationService' for business logic LocationController.onMessage() makes LocationService send a message back to the requested JMSReplyTo queue Same BMT concept, same @PostConstruct concept all use the same connection factory to access the broker Problem: The first message gets send (by SLSB 1) and received (by MDB 2) ok. The sending of the returning message (by SLSB 2) is fine as well. However, SLSB 1 never receives anything - it just times out. I tried without the messageSelector, no change, still no receiving message. Is it not ok to consume message by a session bean? SLSB 1 - TestService.java @Resource(name = "jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactory") private javax.jms.ConnectionFactory connectionFactory; @PostConstruct public void initialize() { try { jmsConnection = connectionFactory.createConnection(); session = jmsConnection.createSession(false, Session.AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE); System.out.println("Connection to JMS Provider established"); } catch (Exception e) { } } public Serializable sendMessageWithResponse(Destination reqDest, Destination respDest, Serializable request) { Serializable response = null; try { utx.begin(); Random rand = new Random(); String correlationId = rand.nextLong() + "-" + (new Date()).getTime(); // prepare the sending message object ObjectMessage reqMsg = session.createObjectMessage(); reqMsg.setObject(request); reqMsg.setJMSReplyTo(respDest); reqMsg.setJMSCorrelationID(correlationId); // prepare the publishers and subscribers MessageProducer producer = session.createProducer(reqDest); // send the message producer.send(reqMsg); System.out.println("Request Message has been sent!"); utx.commit(); // need to start second transaction, otherwise the first msg never gets sent utx.begin(); MessageConsumer consumer = session.createConsumer(respDest, "JMSCorrelationID = '" + correlationId + "'"); jmsConnection.start(); ObjectMessage respMsg = (ObjectMessage) consumer.receive(10000L); utx.commit(); if (respMsg != null) { response = respMsg.getObject(); System.out.println("Response Message has been received!"); } else { // timeout waiting for response System.out.println("Timeout waiting for response!"); } } catch (Exception e) { } return response; } SLSB 2 - LocationService.Java (only the reply method, rest is same as above) public boolean reply(Message origMsg, Serializable o) { boolean rc = false; try { // check if we have necessary correlationID and replyTo destination if (!origMsg.getJMSCorrelationID().equals("") && (origMsg.getJMSReplyTo() != null)) { // prepare the payload utx.begin(); ObjectMessage msg = session.createObjectMessage(); msg.setObject(o); // make it a response msg.setJMSCorrelationID(origMsg.getJMSCorrelationID()); Destination dest = origMsg.getJMSReplyTo(); // send it MessageProducer producer = session.createProducer(dest); producer.send(msg); producer.close(); System.out.println("Reply Message has been sent"); utx.commit(); rc = true; } } catch (Exception e) {} return rc; } sun-resources.xml <admin-object-resource enabled="true" jndi-name="jms/mvs.LocationControllerRequest" res-type="javax.jms.Queue" res-adapter="jmsra"> <property name="Name" value="mvs.LocationControllerRequestQueue"/> </admin-object-resource> <admin-object-resource enabled="true" jndi-name="jms/mvs.LocationControllerResponse" res-type="javax.jms.Queue" res-adapter="jmsra"> <property name="Name" value="mvs.LocationControllerResponseQueue"/> </admin-object-resource> <connector-connection-pool name="jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactoryPool" connection-definition-name="javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory" resource-adapter-name="jmsra"/> <connector-resource enabled="true" jndi-name="jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactory" pool-name="jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactoryPool" />

  Read the article

• is magento overkill for a one-man webshop?

  - by Rick J

  I have been looking at magento for a while and I think I have a decent handle on how to use/customize it. I have a client that wants a webshop , this is just a small business that sells a few products and just supports one language. I was wondering if using magento will be an overkill for a simple webshop , in case I cant help them to make future changes tp the webshop, the people running their business might have to do it. But it looks like magento is made for people with some technical know how (lots of xml editing etc).. So should i go for magento or a simpler solution like osCommerce or maybe even a simple custom solution. Would like to hear your opinions!

  Read the article

• Analysing a Visual Foxpro application to derive requirements. Tools/approaches/practices?

  - by Kabeer

  Hello. In an upcoming project I am supposed to re-engineer a huge application built on Visual Foxpro into a web-application. The target platform is .Net. The application from the end-users' perspective is very complex (complex forms, reports, navigation, etc). The sorry state is that there are no documents available from which I can derive, business processes, business rules, work-flows, validations, application state, etc. I can gather some requirements from end-users but it cannot be complete from any perspective. Maneuvering through the code would be tedious & time consuming, given the millions of lines of code. Therefore I am looking for a tool that can help me in code analysis. My googling attempt didn't help me at least for a Visual Foxpro code base. Besides, I will appreciate if someone can share processes/approaches/techniques to establish the requirements as far as possible. BTW, this link didn't quite help.

  Read the article

• Project roles discovery

  - by Lirik

  I have a school project in which we're going to write a financial engine prototype by a group of 4 people. Most of us have never met each other before, so I'm trying to create a questionnaire to help us find the appropriate roles for each team-member. We have the following responsibilities: Database design Programming User interface design Training Documentation / technical writing Network design Project management Business analysis Testing And we have the following roles: Project Manager Developer Tester Business Analyst Our group has people with various experience: a full-time graduate student, an associate director at the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange), full-time professionals, etc. Do any of you know of any tools that would help build a questionnaire or do you have a reference to an online questionnaire that can help us identify the most suitable role(s) for each team member?

  Read the article

• YAML to CSV converter-does one exist already?

  - by Joel

  Hi folks, I'm wanting to migrate contacts from one CRM to another. The first only exports all the data I need in YAML. The second only imports with CSV. Is there a converter out there that already exists, or do I need to build one specific to this job? Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212  | Next Page >