Search Results

Search found 5751 results on 231 pages for 'analysis patterns'.

Page 21/231 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Passing a file with multiple patterns to grep

    - by Michael Goldshteyn
    Let's say we have two files. match.txt: A file containing patterns to match: fed ghi tsr qpo data.txt: A file containing lines of text: abc fed ghi jkl mno pqr stu vwx zyx wvu tsr qpo Now, I want to issue a grep command that should return the first and third line from data.txt: abc fed ghi jkl zyx wvu tsr qpo ... because each of these two lines match one of the patterns in match.txt. I have tried: grep -F -f match.txt data.txt but that returns no results. grep info: GNU grep 2.6.3 (cygwin) OS info: Windows 2008 R2 Update: It seems, that grep is confused by the space in the search pattern lines, but with the -F flag, it should be treating each line in match.txt as an individual match pattern.

    Read the article

  • Using a service registry that doesn’t suck part II: Dear registry, do you have to be a message broker?

    - by gsusx
    Continuing our series of posts about service registry patterns that suck, we decided to address one of the most common techniques that Service Oriented (SOA) governance tools use to enforce policies. Scenario Service registries and repositories serve typically as a mechanism for storing service policies that model behaviors such as security, trust, reliable messaging, SLAs, etc. This makes perfect sense given that SOA governance registries were conceived as a mechanism to store and manage the policies...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Speaking at Microsoft's Duth DevDays

    - by gsusx
    Last week I had the pleasure of presenting two sessions at Microsoft's Dutch DevDays at Den Hague. On Tuesday I presented a sessions about how to implement real world RESTFul services patterns using WCF, WCF Data Services and ASP.NET MVC2. During that session I showed a total of 15 small demos that highlighted how to implement key aspects of RESTful solutions such as Security, LowREST clients, URI modeling, Validation, Error Handling, etc. As part of those demos I used the OAuth implementation created...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Explanation needed, for “Ask, don't tell” approach?

    - by the_naive
    I'm taking a course on design patterns in software engineering and here I'm trying to understand the good and the bad way of design relating to "coupling" and "cohesion". I could not understand the concept described in the following image. The example of code shown in the image is ambiguous to me, so I can't quite clearly get what exactly "Ask, don't tell!" approach mean. Could you please explain?

    Read the article

  • Good design cannot be over-design

    - by ??? Shengyuan Lu
    Many engineers intend to design software to build "flexible" system in which many design patterns and interfaces there. Eventually too many interfaces and complex inheritances mess up the system. In most cases I think the improper design caused the mess, rather than not over-design. If design is reasonable, it's hard to be over. Alternatively, If we don't have enough skill to achieve flexible design, we choose to plain and practical design. What's your opinion about my understanding?

    Read the article

  • Development: SDK for Social Net

    - by loldop
    I have a task: development sdk for social networking service like facebook, twitter and etc. At now i'm developing facebook-extension-sdk which based on facebook-ios-sdk 3.0. But not all social networking services have good sdks. And all time i improved my facebook-extension-sdk, when i see ugly code :( Please, advise me good techniques to development these sdks (like design-patterns or your own experience or good books/sites). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to keep balance / Unlock items / achievement rules

    - by Mark Knol
    I'm working on an engine for a game, too learn javascript and just because its fun. I'm a flashdeveloper, I know how to build websites. Now making games is a different challenge, javascript is a challenge, but I'd love to learn how to structure code and what patterns are common. I dont mind if the game ever finish, I'm mostly interested in the programming part of it. I dont have a particular endresult in mind, so I'll see where it takes me. I currently have a system where you can buy items. The items cost a specified amount of gold, silver, diamonds etc. When you have selected and bought the item, it takes time before getting rewarded. When time is over, you are getting rewarded with other properties (gold, energy, diamonds). For example, you can buy an apple for 50gold, It takes a minute, you get rewarded with 75energy. Or if you take a run, it cost 50energy, it takes 5minutes, reward is 25gold and 25silver. These definitions is what i call actions. Currently I already have a system where this already works and I can define as much actions with as much properties as I want. The definitions I have kinda looks like this: {id:101, category:544, onInit:{gold:-75}, onComplete:{energy:75}, time:2000, name:"Apple", locked: false} {id:102, category:544, onInit:{gold:-135}, onComplete:{energy:145}, time:2000, name:"Banana", locked: false} {id:106, category:302, onInit:{energy:-50, power: -25}, onComplete:{gold:100, diamonds:2}, time:10000, name:"Run", locked: false} {id:107, category:302, onInit:{energy:-70, silver: -55}, onComplete:{gold:100}, time:10000, name:"Dance", locked: false} {id:108, category:302, onInit:{energy:-230, power: -355}, onComplete:{gold:70, silver:70}, time:10000, name:"Fitness", locked: false} Now, I would love to add a system where I can lock/unlock the actions using achievement rules. Lets say, if you buy 10 apples, you unlock a new action, like bananas which cost more, and reward more. In the future I maybe want to restrict achievements and actions to levels. I am kinda stuck how to structure this. I have 2 questions: Which patterns are used to define achievements? How/where are they defined? Should it be part of the action, or should it be a separate controller? Is it a good idea to register all completed actions to it? I think I want multiple types of achievement rules, Id love to hear some ideas how to develop it. How do you create/find a good balance, so the user does not get stuck or can cheat by repeat a pattern of actions to get too much rewards. I know there is not a simple answer and i'm lacking of a good game-concept, but I wonder if anyone created such a game and how you dealed and played with it.

    Read the article

  • As a tooling/automation developer, can I be making better use of OOP?

    - by Tom Pickles
    My time as a developer (~8 yrs) has been spent creating tooling/automation of one sort or another. The tools I develop usually interface with one or more API's. These API's could be win32, WMI, VMWare, a help-desk application, LDAP, you get the picture. The apps I develop could be just to pull back data and store/report. It could be to provision groups of VM's to create live like mock environments, update a trouble ticket etc. I've been developing in .Net and I'm currently reading into design patterns and trying to think about how I can improve my skills to make better use of and increase my understanding of OOP. For example, I've never used an interface of my own making in anger (which is probably not a good thing), because I honestly cannot identify where using one would benefit later on when modifying my code. My classes are usually very specific and I don't create similar classes with similar properties/methods which could use a common interface (like perhaps a car dealership or shop application might). I generally use an n-tier approach to my apps, having a presentation layer, a business logic/manager layer which interfaces with layer(s) that make calls to the API's I'm working with. My business entities are always just method-less container objects, which I populate with data and pass back and forth between my API interfacing layer using static methods to proxy/validate between the front and the back end. My code by nature of my work, has few common components, at least from what I can see. So I'm struggling to see how I can better make use of OOP design and perhaps reusable patterns. Am I right to be concerned that I could be being smarter about how I work, or is what I'm doing now right for my line of work? Or, am I missing something fundamental in OOP? EDIT: Here is some basic code to show how my mgr and api facing layers work. I use static classes as they do not persist any data, only facilitate moving it between layers. public static class MgrClass { public static bool PowerOnVM(string VMName) { // Perform logic to validate or apply biz logic // call APIClass to do the work return APIClass.PowerOnVM(VMName); } } public static class APIClass { public static bool PowerOnVM(string VMName) { // Calls to 3rd party API to power on a virtual machine // returns true or false if was successful for example } }

    Read the article

  • .Net Application & Database Modularity/Reuse

    - by Martaver
    I'm looking for some guidance on how to architect an app with regards to modularity, separation of concerns and re-usability. I'm working on an application (ASP.Net, C#) that has distinctly generic chunks of functionality, that I'd love to be able to lift out, all layers, into re-usable components. This means the module handles the database schema, data access, API, everything so that the next time I want to use it I can just register the module and hook into it. Developing modules of re-usable functionality is a no-brainer, but what is really confusing me is what to do when it comes to handling a core re-usable database schema that serves the module's functionality. In an ideal world, I would register a module and it would ensure that the associated database schema exists in the DB. I would code on the assumption that the tables exist, calling the module's functionality through the DLL, agnostic of the database layer. Kind of like Enterprise Library's Caching/Logging Application Block, which can create a DB schema in the target DB to use as a data store. My Questions is: What do you think is the best way to achieve this, firstly, in terms design architecture, and secondly solution structure. What patterns/frameworks do you know that exist & support this kind of thing? My thoughts so far: I mostly use Entity Framework and SQL Server DB Projects. I thought about a 'black box' approach to modules of functionality. I could use use a code-first approach in EF4, and use the ObjectContext to create a database when the module is initialized. However this means that all of the entities that my module encapsulates would be disconnected from the rest of the application because they belonged to an abstracted ObjectContext. Further - Creating appropriate indexes and references between domain entities and the module's entities would be impossible to do practically. I've thought of adopting Enterprise Library and creating my own Application Blocks. I'm not sure how this would play nice with Entity Framework (if at all) though. I like the idea of building on proven patterns & practices to encapsulate established, reusable functionality. I thought of abandoning Entity Framework for the Module, and just creating a separate DB schema for the module with its own set of stored procedures & ADO.Net. Then deploying the script at run-time if interrogation shows that it doesn't exist. But once again, for application developing outside of the application, I would want to use Entity Framework and I would have to use the module separately, disconnected from the domain ObjectContext. Has anyone had experience developing these sorts of full-stack modules? What advice can you offer? Am I biting off more than I can chew?

    Read the article

  • Self-Executing Anonymous Function vs Prototype

    - by Robotsushi
    In Javascript there are a few clearly prominent techniques for create and manage classes/namespaces in javascript. I am curious what situations warrant using one technique vs. the other. I want to pick one and stick with it moving forward. I write enterprise code that is maintained and shared across multiple teams, and I want to know what is the best practice when writing maintainable javascript ? I tend to prefer Self-Executing Anonymous Functions however I am curious what the community vote is on these techniques. Prototype : function obj() { } obj.prototype.test = function() { alert('Hello?'); }; var obj2 = new obj(); obj2.test(); Self-Closing Anonymous Function : //Self-Executing Anonymous Function (function( skillet, $, undefined ) { //Private Property var isHot = true; //Public Property skillet.ingredient = "Bacon Strips"; //Public Method skillet.fry = function() { var oliveOil; addItem( "\t\n Butter \n\t" ); addItem( oliveOil ); console.log( "Frying " + skillet.ingredient ); }; //Private Method function addItem( item ) { if ( item !== undefined ) { console.log( "Adding " + $.trim(item) ); } } }( window.skillet = window.skillet || {}, jQuery )); //Public Properties console.log( skillet.ingredient ); //Bacon Strips //Public Methods skillet.fry(); //Adding Butter & Fraying Bacon Strips //Adding a Public Property skillet.quantity = "12"; console.log( skillet.quantity ); //12 //Adding New Functionality to the Skillet (function( skillet, $, undefined ) { //Private Property var amountOfGrease = "1 Cup"; //Public Method skillet.toString = function() { console.log( skillet.quantity + " " + skillet.ingredient + " & " + amountOfGrease + " of Grease" ); console.log( isHot ? "Hot" : "Cold" ); }; }( window.skillet = window.skillet || {}, jQuery )); //end of skillet definition try { //12 Bacon Strips & 1 Cup of Grease skillet.toString(); //Throws Exception } catch( e ) { console.log( e.message ); //isHot is not defined } I feel that I should mention that the Self-Executing Anonymous Function is the pattern used by the jQuery team. Update When I asked this question I didn't truly see the importance of what I was trying to understand. The real issue at hand is whether or not to use new to create instances of your objects or to use patterns which do not require constructors of the use of the new keyword. I added my own answer, because in my opinion we should make use of patterns which don't use the new keyword. For more information please see my answer.

    Read the article

  • Identifying which pattern fits better.

    - by Daniel Grillo
    I'm developing a software to program a device. I have some commands like Reset, Read_Version, Read_memory, Write_memory, Erase_memory. Reset and Read_Version are fixed. They don't need parameters. Read_memory and Erase_memory need the same parameters that are Length and Address. Write_memory needs Lenght, Address and Data. For each command, I have the same steps in sequence, that are something like this sendCommand, waitForResponse, treatResponse. I'm having difficulty to identify which pattern should I use. Factory, Template Method, Strategy or other pattern. Edit I'll try to explain better taking in count the given comments and answers. I've already done this software and now I'm trying to refactoring it. I'm trying to use patterns, even if it is not necessary because I'm taking advantage of this little software to learn about some patterns. Despite I think that one (or more) pattern fits here and it could improve my code. When I want to read version of the software of my device, I don't have to assembly the command with parameters. It is fixed. So I have to send it. After wait for response. If there is a response, treat (or parse) it and returns. To read a portion of the memory (maximum of 256 bytes), I have to assembly the command using the parameters Len and Address. So I have to send it. After wait for response. If there is a response, treat (or parse) it and returns. To write a portion in the memory (maximum of 256 bytes), I have to assembly the command using the parameters Len, Address and Data. So I have to send it. After wait for response. If there is a response, treat (or parse) it and returns. I think that I could use Template Method because I have almost the same algorithm for all. But the problem is some commands are fixes, others have 2 or 3 parameters. I think that parameters should be passed on the constructor of the class. But each class will have a constructor overriding the abstract class constructor. Is this a problem for the template method? Should I use other pattern?

    Read the article

  • correct pattern to handle a lot of entities in a game

    - by lezebulon
    In my game I usually have every NPC / items etc being derived from a base class "entity". Then they all basically have a virtual method called "update" that I would class for each entity in my game at every frame. I am assuming that this is a pattern that has a lot of downsides. What are some other ways to manage different "game objects" throughout the game? Are there other well-known patterns for this? My game is a RPG if that changes anything

    Read the article

  • Choosing the right Design Pattern

    - by Carl Sagan
    I've always recognized the importance of utilizing design patterns. I'm curious as to how other developers go about choosing the most appropriate one. Do you use a series of characteristics (like a flowchart) to help you decide? For example: If objects are related, but we do not want to specify concrete class, consider Abstract When instantiation is left to derived classes, consider Factory Need to access elements of an aggregate object sequentially, try Iterator or something similar?

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – Download Whitepaper – Choosing a Tabular or Multidimensional Modeling Experience in SQL Server 2012 Analysis Services

    - by pinaldave
    Data modeling is the most important task for any BI professional. Matter of the fact, the biggest challenge is to organizing disparate data into an analytic model that effectively and efficiently supports the reporting and analysis. SQL Server 2012 introduces BI Semantic Model (BISM), a single model that can support a broad range of reporting and analysis while blending two Analysis Services modeling experiences behind the scenes. Multidimensional modeling – enables BI professionals to create sophisticated multidimensional cubes using traditional online analytical processing (OLAP). Tabular modeling – provides self-service data modeling capabilities to business and data analysts. As data modeling is evolving and business needs are growing new technologies and tools are emerging to help end users to make the necessary adjustment to the reporting and analysis needs. This white paper is will provide practical guidance to help you decide which SQL Server 2012 Analysis Services modeling experience – tabular or multidimensional. Do let me know what do is your opinion as a comment. In simple word – I would like to know when will you use Tabular modeling and when Multidimensional modeling? Download Choosing a Tabular or Multidimensional Modeling Experience in SQL Server 2012 Analysis Services Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Business Intelligence, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQL White Papers, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Static code analysis for new language. Where to start?

    - by tinny
    I just been given a new assignment which looks like its going to be an interesting challenge. The customer is wanting a code style checking tool to be developed for their internal (soon to be open sourced) programming language which runs on the JVM. The language syntax is very Java like. The customer basically wants me to produce something like checkstyle. So my question is this, how would you approach this problem? Given a clean slate what recommendations would you make to the customer? I think I have 3 options Write something from scratch. Id prefer not to do this as it seems like this sort of code analysis tool problem has been solved so many times that there must be a more "framework" or "platform" orientated approach. Fork an existing code style checking tool and modify the parsing to fit with this new language etc etc Extend or plug into an existing static code analysis tool. (maybe write a plugin for Yasca?) Maybe you would like to share your experiences in this area? Thanks for reading

    Read the article

  • Enabling Kerberos Authentication for Reporting Services

    - by robcarrol
    Recently, I’ve helped several customers with Kerberos authentication problems with Reporting Services and Analysis Services, so I’ve decided to write this blog post and pull together some useful resources in one place (there are 2 whitepapers in particular that I found invaluable configuring Kerberos authentication, and these can be found in the references section at the bottom of this post). In most of these cases, the problem has manifested itself with the Login failed for User ‘NT Authority\Anonymous’ (“double-hop”) error. By default, Reporting Services uses Windows Integrated Authentication, which includes the Kerberos and NTLM protocols for network authentication. Additionally, Windows Integrated Authentication includes the negotiate security header, which prompts the client to select Kerberos or NTLM for authentication. The client can access reports which have the appropriate permissions by using Kerberos for authentication. Servers that use Kerberos authentication can impersonate those clients and use their security context to access network resources. You can configure Reporting Services to use both Kerberos and NTLM authentication; however this may lead to a failure to authenticate. With negotiate, if Kerberos cannot be used, the authentication method will default to NTLM. When negotiate is enabled, the Kerberos protocol is always used except when: Clients/servers that are involved in the authentication process cannot use Kerberos. The client does not provide the information necessary to use Kerberos. An in-depth discussion of Kerberos authentication is beyond the scope of this post, however when users execute reports that are configured to use Windows Integrated Authentication, their logon credentials are passed from the report server to the server hosting the data source. Delegation needs to be set on the report server and Service Principle Names (SPNs) set for the relevant services. When a user processes a report, the request must go through a Web server on its way to a database server for processing. Kerberos authentication enables the Web server to request a service ticket from the domain controller; impersonate the client when passing the request to the database server; and then restrict the request based on the user’s permissions. Each time a server is required to pass the request to another server, the same process must be used. Kerberos authentication is supported in both native and SharePoint integrated mode, but I’ll focus on native mode for the purpose of this post (I’ll explain configuring SharePoint integrated mode and Kerberos authentication in a future post). Configuring Kerberos avoids the authentication failures due to double-hop issues. These double-hop errors occur when a users windows domain credentials can’t be passed to another server to complete the user’s request. In the case of my customers, users were executing Reporting Services reports that were configured to query Analysis Services cubes on a separate machine using Windows Integrated security. The double-hop issue occurs as NTLM credentials are valid for only one network hop, subsequent hops result in anonymous authentication. The client attempts to connect to the report server by making a request from a browser (or some other application), and the connection process begins with authentication. With NTLM authentication, client credentials are presented to Computer 2. However Computer 2 can’t use the same credentials to access Computer 3 (so we get the Anonymous login error). To access Computer 3 it is necessary to configure the connection string with stored credentials, which is what a number of customers I have worked with have done to workaround the double-hop authentication error. However, to get the benefits of Windows Integrated security, a better solution is to enable Kerberos authentication. Again, the connection process begins with authentication. With Kerberos authentication, the client and the server must demonstrate to one another that they are genuine, at which point authentication is successful and a secure client/server session is established. In the illustration above, the tiers represent the following: Client tier (computer 1): The client computer from which an application makes a request. Middle tier (computer 2): The Web server or farm where the client’s request is directed. Both the SharePoint and Reporting Services server(s) comprise the middle tier (but we’re only concentrating on native deployments just now). Back end tier (computer 3): The Database/Analysis Services server/Cluster where the requested data is stored. In order to enable Kerberos authentication for Reporting Services it’s necessary to configure the relevant SPNs, configure trust for delegation for server accounts, configure Kerberos with full delegation and configure the authentication types for Reporting Services. Service Principle Names (SPNs) are unique identifiers for services and identify the account’s type of service. If an SPN is not configured for a service, a client account will be unable to authenticate to the servers using Kerberos. You need to be a domain administrator to add an SPN, which can be added using the SetSPN utility. For Reporting Services in native mode, the following SPNs need to be registered --SQL Server Service SETSPN -S mssqlsvc/servername:1433 Domain\SQL For named instances, or if the default instance is running under a different port, then the specific port number should be used. --Reporting Services Service SETSPN -S http/servername Domain\SSRS SETSPN -S http/servername.domain.com Domain\SSRS The SPN should be set for the NETBIOS name of the server and the FQDN. If you access the reports using a host header or DNS alias, then that should also be registered SETSPN -S http/www.reports.com Domain\SSRS --Analysis Services Service SETSPN -S msolapsvc.3/servername Domain\SSAS Next, you need to configure trust for delegation, which refers to enabling a computer to impersonate an authenticated user to services on another computer: Location Description Client 1. The requesting application must support the Kerberos authentication protocol. 2. The user account making the request must be configured on the domain controller. Confirm that the following option is not selected: Account is sensitive and cannot be delegated. Servers 1. The service accounts must be trusted for delegation on the domain controller. 2. The service accounts must have SPNs registered on the domain controller. If the service account is a domain user account, the domain administrator must register the SPNs. In Active Directory Users and Computers, verify that the domain user accounts used to access reports have been configured for delegation (the ‘Account is sensitive and cannot be delegated’ option should not be selected): We then need to configure the Reporting Services service account and computer to use Kerberos with full delegation:   We also need to do the same for the SQL Server or Analysis Services service accounts and computers (depending on what type of data source you are connecting to in your reports). Finally, and this is the part that sometimes gets over-looked, we need to configure the authentication type correctly for reporting services to use Kerberos authentication. This is configured in the Authentication section of the RSReportServer.config file on the report server. <Authentication> <AuthenticationTypes>           <RSWindowsNegotiate/> </AuthenticationTypes> <EnableAuthPersistence>true</EnableAuthPersistence> </Authentication> This will enable Kerberos authentication for Internet Explorer. For other browsers, see the link below. The report server instance must be restarted for these changes to take effect. Once these changes have been made, all that’s left to do is test to make sure Kerberos authentication is working properly by running a report from report manager that is configured to use Windows Integrated authentication (either connecting to Analysis Services or SQL Server back-end). Resources: Manage Kerberos Authentication Issues in a Reporting Services Environment http://download.microsoft.com/download/B/E/1/BE1AABB3-6ED8-4C3C-AF91-448AB733B1AF/SSRSKerberos.docx Configuring Kerberos Authentication for Microsoft SharePoint 2010 Products http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=23176 How to: Configure Windows Authentication in Reporting Services http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc281253.aspx RSReportServer Configuration File http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms157273.aspx#Authentication Planning for Browser Support http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms156511.aspx

    Read the article

  • SSAS DMVs: useful links

    - by Davide Mauri
    From time to time happens that I need to extract metadata informations from Analysis Services DMVS in order to quickly get an overview of the entire situation and/or drill down to detail level. As a memo I post the link I use most when need to get documentation on SSAS Objects Data DMVs: SSAS: Using DMV Queries to get Cube Metadata http://bennyaustin.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/ssas-dmv-queries-cube-metadata/ SSAS DMV (Dynamic Management View) http://dwbi1.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/ssas-dmv-dynamic-management-view/ Use Dynamic Management Views (DMVs) to Monitor Analysis Services http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh230820.aspx

    Read the article

  • SSAS DMVs: useful links

    - by Davide Mauri
    From time to time happens that I need to extract metadata informations from Analysis Services DMVS in order to quickly get an overview of the entire situation and/or drill down to detail level. As a memo I post the link I use most when need to get documentation on SSAS Objects Data DMVs: SSAS: Using DMV Queries to get Cube Metadata http://bennyaustin.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/ssas-dmv-queries-cube-metadata/ SSAS DMV (Dynamic Management View) http://dwbi1.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/ssas-dmv-dynamic-management-view/ Use Dynamic Management Views (DMVs) to Monitor Analysis Services http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh230820.aspx

    Read the article

  • Expert Cube Development book finally on Kindle!

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    The book Expert Cube Development with Microsoft SQL Server 2008 Analysis Services is finally available on Kindle ! I received many requests for that and the last one just a couple of days ago from Greg Low in its useful review . I'm curious to see whether the sales of this book will continue also on Kindle. After 2 years this book is still continuing to sell as in the first months. The content is still fresh and will be good also with the next release of Analysis Services for developing multidimensional...(read more)

    Read the article

  • The Many-to-Many Revolution 2.0 #ssas #mdx #dax #m2m

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    In September 2006 I had announced in this blog the release of the first version of The Many-to-Many Revolution, a whitepaper that describes how to leverage the many-to-many dimension relationships feature that had being available since Analysis Services 2005. The paper contains many generic patterns that can be applied in many common data analysis’ scenarios. More than 5 years later and more then 20.000 unique people that downloaded the 1.0 paper, I am proud to announce that we released The Many-to-Many...(read more)

    Read the article

  • empirical studies about the benefit of q&a sites on programming [on hold]

    - by nico1510
    I'm looking for empirical papers which investigate if a user can benefit from q&a sites like Stack Overflow. I welcome any papers related to this topic e.g: an experiment, investigating if a specific task can be executed faster, an analysis, investigating if a user understands the solutions on q&a sites or if he just does copy&paste without thinking about it, a comparative analysis of the code quality of users with access to q&a sites in contrast to users without internet access (but just offline documentation of APIs)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >