Search Results

Search found 6196 results on 248 pages for 'minimum requirements'.

Page 22/248 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • Does TDD really work for complex projects?

    - by Amir Rezaei
    I’m asking this question regarding problems I have experienced during TDD projects. I have noticed the following challenges when creating unit tests. Generating and maintaining mock data It’s hard and unrealistic to maintain large mock data. It’s is even harder when database structure undergoes changes. Testing GUI Even with MVVM and ability to test GUI, it takes a lot of code to reproduce the GUI scenario. Testing the business I have experience that TDD works well if you limit it to simple business logic. However complex business logic is hard to test since the number of combinations of tests (test space) is very large. Contradiction in requirements In reality it’s hard to capture all requirements under analysis and design. Many times one note requirements lead to contradiction because the project is complex. The contradiction is found late under implementation phase. TDD requires that requirements are 100% correct. In such cases one could expect that conflicting requirements would be captured during creating of tests. But the problem is that this isn’t the case in complex scenarios. I have read this question: Why does TDD work? Does TDD really work for complex enterprise projects, or is it practically limit to project type?

    Read the article

  • Organising levels / rooms in a MUD-style text based world

    - by Polynomial
    I'm thinking of writing a small text-based adventure game, but I'm not particularly sure how I should design the world from a technical standpoint. My first thought is to do it in XML, designed something like the following. Apologies for the huge pile of XML, but I felt it important to fully explain what I'm doing. <level> <start> <!-- start in kitchen with empty inventory --> <room>Kitchen</room> <inventory></inventory> </start> <rooms> <room> <name>Kitchen</name> <description>A small kitchen that looks like it hasn't been used in a while. It has a table in the middle, and there are some cupboards. There is a door to the north, which leads to the garden.</description> <!-- IDs of the objects the room contains --> <objects> <object>Cupboards</object> <object>Knife</object> <object>Batteries</object> </objects> </room> <room> <name>Garden</name> <description>The garden is wild and full of prickly bushes. To the north there is a path, which leads into the trees. To the south there is a house.</description> <objects> </objects> </room> <room> <name>Woods</name> <description>The woods are quite dark, with little light bleeding in from the garden. It is eerily quiet.</description> <objects> <object>Trees01</object> </objects> </room> </rooms> <doors> <!-- a door isn't necessarily a door. each door has a type, i.e. "There is a <type> leading to..." from and to are references the rooms that this door joins. direction specifies the direction (N,S,E,W,Up,Down) from <from> to <to> --> <door> <type>door</type> <direction>N</direction> <from>Kitchen</from> <to>Garden</to> </door> <door> <type>path</type> <direction>N</direction> <from>Garden</type> <to>Woods</type> </door> </doors> <variables> <!-- variables set by actions --> <variable name="cupboard_open">0</variable> </variables> <objects> <!-- definitions for objects --> <object> <name>Trees01</name> <displayName>Trees</displayName> <actions> <!-- any actions not defined will show the default failure message --> <action> <command>EXAMINE</command> <message>The trees are tall and thick. There aren't any low branches, so it'd be difficult to climb them.</message> </action> </actions> </object> <object> <name>Cupboards</name> <displayName>Cupboards</displayName> <actions> <action> <!-- requirements make the command only work when they are met --> <requirements> <!-- equivilent of "if(cupboard_open == 1)" --> <require operation="equal" value="1">cupboard_open</require> </requirements> <command>EXAMINE</command> <!-- fail message is the message displayed when the requirements aren't met --> <failMessage>The cupboard is closed.</failMessage> <message>The cupboard contains some batteires.</message> </action> <action> <requirements> <require operation="equal" value="0">cupboard_open</require> </requirements> <command>OPEN</command> <failMessage>The cupboard is already open.</failMessage> <message>You open the cupboard. It contains some batteries.</message> <!-- assigns is a list of operations performed on variables when the action succeeds --> <assigns> <assign operation="set" value="1">cupboard_open</assign> </assigns> </action> <action> <requirements> <require operation="equal" value="1">cupboard_open</require> </requirements> <command>CLOSE</command> <failMessage>The cupboard is already closed.</failMessage> <message>You closed the cupboard./message> <assigns> <assign operation="set" value="0">cupboard_open</assign> </assigns> </action> </actions> </object> <object> <name>Batteries</name> <displayName>Batteries</displayName> <!-- by setting inventory to non-zero, we can put it in our bag --> <inventory>1</inventory> <actions> <action> <requirements> <require operation="equal" value="1">cupboard_open</require> </requirements> <command>GET</command> <!-- failMessage isn't required here, it'll just show the usual "You can't see any <blank>." message --> <message>You picked up the batteries.</message> </action> </actions> </object> </objects> </level> Obviously there'd need to be more to it than this. Interaction with people and enemies as well as death and completion are necessary additions. Since the XML is quite difficult to work with, I'd probably create some sort of world editor. I'd like to know if this method has any downfalls, and if there's a "better" or more standard way of doing it.

    Read the article

  • Hands-On Course Requirement: Applicability

    - by Paul Sorensen
    Hi Everyone,Recently there has been some confusion regarding the need for partner-related candidates to meet the hands-on course requirement for tracks that require it. I thought it would be wise to clarify this point on the blog. A recurring question that we have been getting is:Question: Do partner candidates need to meet a hands-on course requirement?Answer: Yes. In order for a person to become certified they must meet the certification requirements for the track that they are pursuing (as listed on the Oracle certification web site). Regardless of candidate type - partner, customer, employee, etc. - all of the certification requirements for a track must be met. Partner-related certification candidates must therefore meet the hands-on course requirement if the track requires it (i.e. they are not exempt from any of the requirements for any given certification).Thanks!QUICK LINKSOracle certification web siteHands-on Course Attendance Requirements

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture - From design to sucessful implementation

    - by user20358
    As the subject goes; once a software architect puts down the high level design and approach to a software that is to be developed from scratch, how does the team ensure that it is implemented successfully? To my mind the following things will need to be done Proper understanding of requirements Setting down coding practices and guidelines Regular code reviews to ensure the guidelines are being adhered to Revisiting the requirements phase and making necessary changes to design based on client inputs if there are any changes to requirements Proper documentation of what is being done in code Proper documentation of requirements and changes to them Last but not the least, implementing the design via object oriented code where appropriate Did I miss anything? Would love to hear any mistakes that you have learned from in your project experiences. What went wrong, what could have been done better. Thanks for taking the time..

    Read the article

  • How to make a great functional specification

    - by sfrj
    I am going to start a little side project very soon, but this time i want to do not just the little UML domain model and case diagrams i often do before programming, i thought about making a full functional specification. Is there anybody that has experience writing functional specifications that could recommend me what i need to add to it? How would be the best way to start preparing it? Here i will write down the topics that i think are more relevant: Purpose Functional Overview Context Diagram Critical Project Success Factors Scope (In & Out) Assumptions Actors (Data Sources, System Actors) Use Case Diagram Process Flow Diagram Activity Diagram Security Requirements Performance Requirements Special Requirements Business Rules Domain Model (Data model) Flow Scenarios (Success, alternate…) Time Schedule (Task Management) Goals System Requirements Expected Expenses What do you think about those topics? Shall i add something else? or maybe remove something?

    Read the article

  • Developing configuration syntax - best practise/rules/methods?

    - by Isaac
    I am currently developing a small application, which checks if provided data meets certain requirements. The requirements are actually a long list, and might be changing, so I defined a syntax which allows me to state all of the requirements briefly and in a seperate file. Now the overall requirements for the application have changed, and I need to change my configuration syntax. Which leeds me to wonder if there is methodoloy or best practise for developing such syntaxes. Currently what I do is I think about the requirements and come up with an initial syntax, start configuring the first few items and see how it works. If I come upon something that does not work well or not at all with the current syntax, I change the syntax, if possible in a backward compatible way. This somehow works for me, but it feels a bit like fishing in troubled water. Also I feel it does not nessessarly lead to the most concise and easy to understand/use syntax. So I was wondering what other people do, especially if there is a better approach to this.

    Read the article

  • How to apply verification and validation on the following example

    - by user970696
    I have been following verification and validation questions here with my colleagues, yet we are unable to see the slight differences, probably caused by language barrier in technical English. An example: Requirement specification User wants to control the lights in 4 rooms by remote command sent from the UI for each room separately. Functional specification The UI will contain 4 checkboxes labelled according to rooms they control. When a checkbox is checked, the signal is sent to corresponding light. A green dot appears next to the checkbox When a checkbox is unchecked, the signal (turn off) is sent to corresponding light. A red dot appears next to the checkbox. Let me start with what I learned here: Verification, according to many great answers here, ensures that product reflects specified requirements - as functional spec is done by a producer based on requirements from customer, this one will be verified for completeness, correctness). Then design document will be checked against functional spec (it should design 4 checkboxes..), and the source code against design (is there a code for 4 checkboxes, functions to send the signals etc. - is it traceable to requirements). Okay, product is built and we need to test it, validate. Here comes our understanding trouble - validation should ensure the product meets requirements for its specific intended use which is basically business requirement (does it work? can I control the lights from the UI?) but testers will definitely work with the functional spec, making sure the checkboxes are there, working, labelled, etc. They are basically checking whether the requirements in functional spec were met in the final product, isn't that verification? (should not be, lets stick to ISO 12207 that only validation is the actual testing)

    Read the article

  • A key principle of Scrum...

    - by AndyScott
    "A key principle of Scrum is its recognition that during a project the customers can change their minds about what they want and need (often called requirements churn), and that unpredicted challenges cannot be easily addressed in a traditional predictive or planned manner. As such, Scrum adopts an empirical approach—accepting that the problem cannot be fully understood or defined, focusing instead on maximizing the team’s ability to deliver quickly and respond to emerging requirements." I have been working in a SCRUM environment, with 4-6 week cycles, for about 6 months now and have been very pleased with the impact that it has had on my life (regular work hours, seeing my family, etc).  But was looking up the criteria for a 'Certified Scrum Master' and came across the SCRUM definition on Wikipedia, and started reading the actual definition.  My first thought was "hey, this development methodology actually allows you to deal with what happens in the real world (i.e. customers changing requirements); but is this "selling out" on solid requirements? I understand that this works in the environment that I am currently working in, where there are deep pockets paying the bills, and also making the descisions on what requirements to change / impliment; but is this a recepie for success in smaller or simply more budget concious environments?  Having the ability to be completely flexible when the client wants the product changed.   The more I think about it, the more I feel that SCRUM development may be better suited for an environment where a team is taking over a project from another team (bringing some outside development in-house or something of that ilk), as opposed to ground up development. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • Validation and Verification explanation (Boehm) - I cannot understand its point

    - by user970696
    Hopefully my last thread about V&V as I found the B.Boehm is text which I just do not understand well (likely my technical English is not that good). http://csse.usc.edu/csse/TECHRPTS/1979/usccse79-501/usccse79-501.pdf Basically he says that verification is about checking that products derived from requirements baseline must correspond to it and that deviation leads only to changes in these derived products (design, code). But he says it begins with design and ends with acceptance tests (you can check the V model inside). The thing is, I have accepted ISO12207 in terms of all testing is validation, yet it does not make any sense here. In order to be sure the product complies with requirements (acceptance test) I need to test it. Also it says that validation problems means that requirements are bad and needs to be changed - which does not happen with testing that testers do, who just checks correspondence with requirements.

    Read the article

  • HOWTO: Disable complex password policy on Hyper-V Server 2008?

    - by Ian Boyd
    How do you disable the password complexity requirements on a Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2008 R2? Keep in mind that when you log into the server, the only UI you have is: And you cannot run gpedit.msc: C:\Users\Administrator>gpedit.msc 'gpedit.msc' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. because there are no .msc snap-ins installed with Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2008 R2. The problem comes when you're trying to add an account to the server, so you can manage it, but it doesn't like most passwords: And, predictably, typing NET HELPMSG 2245 gives you The password does not meet the password policy requirements. Check the minimum p assword length, password complexity and password history requirements. i hoped it would have been a friendly user experience, and either: offered to disable the password policy tell me how to disable the password policy tell me how to check the minimum password length, password complexity and password history requirements. Password Complexity Requirements The Microsoft's default password complexity for Server Core is: Passwords cannot contain the user’s account name or parts of the user’s full name that exceed two consecutive characters. Passwords must be at least six characters in length. Passwords must contain characters from three of the following four categories: 1.English uppercase characters (A through Z). 2.English lowercase characters (a through z). 3.Base 10 digits (0 through 9). 4.Non-alphabetic characters (for example, !, $, #, %). External links Technet Forums: Hyper-V Server disable complex passwords Technet: Passwords must meet complexity requirements of the installed password filter Update: 2k views? So many people keep coming coming to it: up-vote it!

    Read the article

  • Package upgrade on Ubuntu raid server and grub setup issue

    - by RecNes
    I have remote Ubuntu 10.10 server running on raid system. I did package upgrade yesterday night for security reasons. During the upgrade, grub installation screen appeared and asked me which partition I wanted to install grub. Options are sda,sdb,md1 and md2. I decide to install them on both sda and sdb partitions. I wondering, was I make true decision? If machine get reboot is it can be boot up safely? You can find fdisk output and fstab mount points below: Fstab: proc /proc proc defaults 0 0 none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 /dev/md0 none swap sw 0 0 /dev/md1 /boot ext3 defaults 0 0 /dev/md2 / ext3 defaults 0 0 Fdisk: Disk /dev/sda: 750.2 GB, 750156374016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 91201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00029bb5 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 1 262 2102562 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda2 263 295 265072+ fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda3 296 91201 730202445 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/md0: 2152 MB, 2152923136 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 525616 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md1: 271 MB, 271319040 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 66240 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md1 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md2: 747.7 GB, 747727224832 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 182550592 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md2 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 750.2 GB, 750156374016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 91201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00088969 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 262 2102562 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 263 295 265072+ fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb3 296 91201 730202445 fd Linux raid autodetect

    Read the article

  • How to use Hardware RAID in Ubuntu Server

    - by user2071938
    I have an Adaptec RAID-Controller and created an RAID-1(Mirroring) succesfully. Now I have installed Ubuntu Server 12.04.3. When I type fdisk -l I get this output: bf@fileserver:~$ sudo fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sda doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sdb doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdc: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders, total 156301488 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0004c454 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 * 2048 499711 248832 83 Linux /dev/sdc2 501758 156301311 77899777 5 Extended /dev/sdc5 501760 156301311 77899776 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-root: 75.6 GB, 75606523904 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9191 cylinders, total 147668992 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-root doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/mapper/ddf1_Data: 1000.1 GB, 1000065728512 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121584 cylinders, total 1953253376 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/ddf1_Data doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-swap_1: 4160 MB, 4160749568 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 505 cylinders, total 8126464 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-swap_1 doesn't contain a valid partition table The 80 GB HDD is for the System The 1000.2 GB HDD should be for my data. But I'm a bit confused becauser there are listed two 1000.2 GB HDDs, due the Hardware RAID shoudln't there be only one HDD vissible to the OS? (I have two 1000.2 GB HDDs in an Raid-1 Array) dmraid gives me bf@fileserver:~$ sudo dmraid -r /dev/sdb: ddf1, ".ddf1_disks", GROUP, ok, 1953253376 sectors, data@ 0 /dev/sda: ddf1, ".ddf1_disks", GROUP, ok, 1953253376 sectors, data@ 0 so It seems to be ok? But how do I partitionate this disks and which one should I mount(sdb or sda?) Hope you can help me thx Florian

    Read the article

  • Recover RAID 5 data after created new array instead of re-using

    - by Brigadieren
    Folks please help - I am a newb with a major headache at hand (perfect storm situation). I have a 3 1tb hdd on my ubuntu 11.04 configured as software raid 5. The data had been copied weekly onto another separate off the computer hard drive until that completely failed and was thrown away. A few days back we had a power outage and after rebooting my box wouldn't mount the raid. In my infinite wisdom I entered mdadm --create -f... command instead of mdadm --assemble and didn't notice the travesty that I had done until after. It started the array degraded and proceeded with building and syncing it which took ~10 hours. After I was back I saw that that the array is successfully up and running but the raid is not I mean the individual drives are partitioned (partition type f8 ) but the md0 device is not. Realizing in horror what I have done I am trying to find some solutions. I just pray that --create didn't overwrite entire content of the hard driver. Could someone PLEASE help me out with this - the data that's on the drive is very important and unique ~10 years of photos, docs, etc. Is it possible that by specifying the participating hard drives in wrong order can make mdadm overwrite them? when I do mdadm --examine --scan I get something like ARRAY /dev/md/0 metadata=1.2 UUID=f1b4084a:720b5712:6d03b9e9:43afe51b name=<hostname>:0 Interestingly enough name used to be 'raid' and not the host hame with :0 appended. Here is the 'sanitized' config entries: DEVICE /dev/sdf1 /dev/sde1 /dev/sdd1 CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes HOMEHOST <system> MAILADDR root ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.2 name=tanserv:0 UUID=f1b4084a:720b5712:6d03b9e9:43afe51b Here is the output from mdstat cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid5 sdd1[0] sdf1[3] sde1[1] 1953517568 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/3] [UUU] unused devices: <none> fdisk shows the following: fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000bf62e Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 9443 75846656 83 Linux /dev/sda2 9443 9730 2301953 5 Extended /dev/sda5 9443 9730 2301952 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/sdb: 750.2 GB, 750156374016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 91201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000de8dd Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 91201 732572001 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdc: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00056a17 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 60801 488384001 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000ca948 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 121601 976760001 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/dm-0: 1250.3 GB, 1250254913536 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 152001 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sde: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x93a66687 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sde1 1 121601 976760001 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sdf: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xe6edc059 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdf1 1 121601 976760001 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/md0: 2000.4 GB, 2000401989632 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 488379392 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 524288 bytes / 1048576 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Per suggestions I did clean up the superblocks and re-created the array with --assume-clean option but with no luck at all. Is there any tool that will help me to revive at least some of the data? Can someone tell me what and how the mdadm --create does when syncs to destroy the data so I can write a tool to un-do whatever was done? After the re-creating of the raid I run fsck.ext4 /dev/md0 and here is the output root@tanserv:/etc/mdadm# fsck.ext4 /dev/md0 e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) fsck.ext4: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks... fsck.ext4: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/md0 The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2 filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2 filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock: e2fsck -b 8193 Per Shanes' suggestion I tried root@tanserv:/home/mushegh# mkfs.ext4 -n /dev/md0 mke2fs 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=128 blocks, Stripe width=256 blocks 122101760 inodes, 488379392 blocks 24418969 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=0 14905 block groups 32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group 8192 inodes per group Superblock backups stored on blocks: 32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208, 4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872, 71663616, 78675968, 102400000, 214990848 and run fsck.ext4 with every backup block but all returned the following: root@tanserv:/home/mushegh# fsck.ext4 -b 214990848 /dev/md0 e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) fsck.ext4: Invalid argument while trying to open /dev/md0 The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2 filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2 filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock: e2fsck -b 8193 <device> Any suggestions? Regards!

    Read the article

  • Sql 2005 problem in set up

    - by kareemsaad
    When I setup sql2005 this problem appear Minimum Hardware Requirement (Warning) Messages Minimum Hardware Requirement The current system does not meet the minimum hardware requirements for this SQL Server release. For detailed hardware and software requirements, see the readme file or SQL Server Books Online. and I continued setup but I couldnot found sql management studio tools in start menue

    Read the article

  • Openvz: What exactly does it mean when tcpsndbuf failcnt increases? Why must there be a minimum difference between limit and barrier?

    - by Antonis Christofides
    When the failcnt of tcpsndbuf increases, what does this mean? Does it mean the system had to go past the barrier, or past the limit? Or, maybe, that the system failed to provide enough buffers, either because it needed to go past the limit, or because it needed to go past the barrier but couldn't because other VMs were using too many resources? I understand the difference between barrier and limit only for disk space, where you can specify a grace period for which the system can exceed the barrier but not the limit. But in resources like tcpsndbuf, which have no such thing as a grace period, what is the meaning of barrier vs. limit? Why does the difference between barrier and limit in tcpsndbuf be at least 2.5KB times tcpnumsock? I could understand it if, e.g., tcpsndbuf should be at least 2.5KB times tcpnumsock (either the barrier or the limit), but why should I care about the difference between the barrier and the limit?

    Read the article

  • swapon --all --verbose : 'read swap header failed: Invalid argument'

    - by user66088
    Recently ran through EnableHibernateWithEncryptedSwap and ran the following command: swapon --all --verbose and received: 'read swap header failed: Invalid argument' How do I fix this? Here's some more pertinent output... Output of sudo fdisk -l: Disk /dev/sda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders, total 156301488 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00006d20 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 499711 248832 83 Linux /dev/sda2 501758 156301311 77899777 5 Extended /dev/sda5 501760 156301311 77899776 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/mapper/ubuntu--t10194-root: 75.5 GB, 75539415040 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9183 cylinders, total 147537920 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/ubuntu--t10194-root doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/mapper/ubuntu--t10194-swap_1: 4227 MB, 4227858432 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 514 cylinders, total 8257536 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x08040000 Disk /dev/mapper/ubuntu--t10194-swap_1 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/mapper/cryptswap1: 4225 MB, 4225761280 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 513 cylinders, total 8253440 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xd2236983 Disk /dev/mapper/cryptswap1 doesn't contain a valid partition table Thanks for any and ALL help!

    Read the article

  • mount another drive to the same directory

    - by Ken Autotron
    I recently purchased a server that was advertised as 2TB (2 1TB drives) in size, when I use it it reports only one of the drives, I would like to be able to use both as if one drive. here is the specs... sudo lshw -C disk *-disk description: ATA Disk product: TOSHIBA DT01ACA1 vendor: Toshiba physical id: 0.0.0 bus info: scsi@1:0.0.0 logical name: /dev/sda version: MS2O serial: 13EJ81XPS size: 931GiB (1TB) capabilities: partitioned partitioned:dos configuration: ansiversion=5 signature=0005b3dd *-disk description: ATA Disk product: TOSHIBA DT01ACA1 vendor: Toshiba physical id: 0.0.0 bus info: scsi@4:0.0.0 logical name: /dev/sdb version: MS2O serial: 13OX3TKPS size: 931GiB (1TB) capabilities: partitioned partitioned:dos configuration: ansiversion=5 signature=00030e86 and fdisk -l Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00030e86 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 4096 41947135 20971520 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 41947136 1952468991 955260928 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb3 1952468992 1953519615 525312 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0005b3dd Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 4096 41947135 20971520 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda2 41947136 1952468991 955260928 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda3 1952468992 1953519615 525312 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/md2: 978.2 GB, 978187124736 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 238815216 cylinders, total 1910521728 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md2 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md1: 21.5 GB, 21474770944 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 5242864 cylinders, total 41942912 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md1 doesn't contain a valid partition table is it possible to mount both drives to say /Home/ so I would have 2TB of usable space?

    Read the article

  • format/build raid 5 with one 4k drive, three 512b

    - by skidawgz
    I have 4 WD 1TB drives which I want to 4x1TB Raid5. I am not sure what course of action to take next. How do I configure my 4th drive (sde) to align with the rest? Will this affect performance? I rcv this msg (which brings me here to ask these question): The device presents a logical sector size that is smaller than the physical sector size. Aligning to a physical sector (or optimal I/O) size boundary is recommended, or performance may be impacted. fdisk -l shows: Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 81 heads, 63 sectors/track, 382818 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xf324ba09 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 2048 1953525167 976761560 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 81 heads, 63 sectors/track, 382818 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x38bcc1f0 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 2048 1953525167 976761560 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 81 heads, 63 sectors/track, 382818 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x570f77e7 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 2048 1953525167 976761560 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sde: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0xeb665e7b Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System

    Read the article

  • The Inkremental Architect&acute;s Napkin - #4 - Make increments tangible

    - by Ralf Westphal
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/theArchitectsNapkin/archive/2014/06/12/the-inkremental-architectacutes-napkin---4---make-increments-tangible.aspxThe driver of software development are increments, small increments, tiny increments. With an increment being a slice of the overall requirement scope thin enough to implement and get feedback from a product owner within 2 days max. Such an increment might concern Functionality or Quality.[1] To make such high frequency delivery of increments possible, the transition from talking to coding needs to be as easy as possible. A user story or some other documentation of what´s supposed to get implemented until tomorrow evening at latest is one side of the medal. The other is where to put the logic in all of the code base. To implement an increment, only logic statements are needed. Functionality like Quality are just about expressions and control flow statements. Think of Assembler code without the CALL/RET instructions. That´s all is needed. Forget about functions, forget about classes. To make a user happy none of that is really needed. It´s just about the right expressions and conditional executions paths plus some memory allocation. Automatic function inlining of compilers which makes it clear how unimportant functions are for delivering value to users at runtime. But why then are there functions? Because they were invented for optimization purposes. We need them for better Evolvability and Production Efficiency. Nothing more, nothing less. No software has become faster, more secure, more scalable, more functional because we gathered logic under the roof of a function or two or a thousand. Functions make logic easier to understand. Functions make us faster in producing logic. Functions make it easier to keep logic consistent. Functions help to conserve memory. That said, functions are important. They are even the pivotal element of software development. We can´t code without them - whether you write a function yourself or not. Because there´s always at least one function in play: the Entry Point of a program. In Ruby the simplest program looks like this:puts "Hello, world!" In C# more is necessary:class Program { public static void Main () { System.Console.Write("Hello, world!"); } } C# makes the Entry Point function explicit, not so Ruby. But still it´s there. So you can think of logic always running in some function. Which brings me back to increments: In order to make the transition from talking to code as easy as possible, it has to be crystal clear into which function you should put the logic. Product owners might be content once there is a sticky note a user story on the Scrum or Kanban board. But developers need an idea of what that sticky note means in term of functions. Because with a function in hand, with a signature to run tests against, they have something to focus on. All´s well once there is a function behind whose signature logic can be piled up. Then testing frameworks can be used to check if the logic is correct. Then practices like TDD can help to drive the implementation. That´s why most code katas define exactly how the API of a solution should look like. It´s a function, maybe two or three, not more. A requirement like “Write a function f which takes this as parameters and produces such and such output by doing x” makes a developer comfortable. Yes, there are all kinds of details to think about, like which algorithm or technology to use, or what kind of state and side effects to consider. Even a single function not only must deliver on Functionality, but also on Quality and Evolvability. Nevertheless, once it´s clear which function to put logic in, you have a tangible starting point. So, yes, what I´m suggesting is to find a single function to put all the logic in that´s necessary to deliver on a the requirements of an increment. Or to put it the other way around: Slice requirements in a way that each increment´s logic can be located under the roof of a single function. Entry points Of course, the logic of a software will always be spread across many, many functions. But there´s always an Entry Point. That´s the most important function for each increment, because that´s the root to put integration or even acceptance tests on. A batch program like the above hello-world application only has a single Entry Point. All logic is reached from there, regardless how deep it´s nested in classes. But a program with a user interface like this has at least two Entry Points: One is the main function called upon startup. The other is the button click event handler for “Show my score”. But maybe there are even more, like another Entry Point being a handler for the event fired when one of the choices gets selected; because then some logic could check if the button should be enabled because all questions got answered. Or another Entry Point for the logic to be executed when the program is close; because then the choices made should be persisted. You see, an Entry Point to me is a function which gets triggered by the user of a software. With batch programs that´s the main function. With GUI programs on the desktop that´s event handlers. With web programs that´s handlers for URL routes. And my basic suggestion to help you with slicing requirements for Spinning is: Slice them in a way so that each increment is related to only one Entry Point function.[2] Entry Points are the “outer functions” of a program. That´s where the environment triggers behavior. That´s where hardware meets software. Entry points always get called because something happened to hardware state, e.g. a key was pressed, a mouse button clicked, the system timer ticked, data arrived over a wire.[3] Viewed from the outside, software is just a collection of Entry Point functions made accessible via buttons to press, menu items to click, gestures, URLs to open, keys to enter. Collections of batch processors I´d thus say, we haven´t moved forward since the early days of software development. We´re still writing batch programs. Forget about “event-driven programming” with its fancy GUI applications. Software is just a collection of batch processors. Earlier it was just one per program, today it´s hundreds we bundle up into applications. Each batch processor is represented by an Entry Point as its root that works on a number of resources from which it reads data to process and to which it writes results. These resources can be the keyboard or main memory or a hard disk or a communication line or a display. Together many batch processors - large and small - form applications the user perceives as a single whole: Software development that way becomes quite simple: just implement one batch processor after another. Well, at least in principle ;-) Features Each batch processor entered through an Entry Point delivers value to the user. It´s an increment. Sometimes its logic is trivial, sometimes it´s very complex. Regardless, each Entry Point represents an increment. An Entry Point implemented thus is a step forward in terms of Agility. At the same time it´s a tangible unit for developers. Therefore, identifying the more or less numerous batch processors in a software system is a rewarding task for product owners and developers alike. That´s where user stories meet code. In this example the user story translates to the Entry Point triggered by clicking the login button on a dialog like this: The batch then retrieves what has been entered via keyboard, loads data from a user store, and finally outputs some kind of response on the screen, e.g. by displaying an error message or showing the next dialog. This is all very simple, but you see, there is not just one thing happening, but several. Get input (email address, password) Load user for email address If user not found report error Check password Hash password Compare hash to hash stored in user Show next dialog Viewed from 10,000 feet it´s all done by the Entry Point function. And of course that´s technically possible. It´s just a bunch of logic and calling a couple of API functions. However, I suggest to take these steps as distinct aspects of the overall requirement described by the user story. Such aspects of requirements I call Features. Features too are increments. Each provides some (small) value of its own to the user. Each can be checked individually by a product owner. Instead of implementing all the logic behind the Login() entry point at once you can move forward increment by increment, e.g. First implement the dialog, let the user enter any credentials, and log him/her in without any checks. Features 1 and 4. Then hard code a single user and check the email address. Features 2 and 2.1. Then check password without hashing it (or use a very simple hash like the length of the password). Features 3. and 3.2 Replace hard coded user with a persistent user directoy, but a very simple one, e.g. a CSV file. Refinement of feature 2. Calculate the real hash for the password. Feature 3.1. Switch to the final user directory technology. Each feature provides an opportunity to deliver results in a short amount of time and get feedback. If you´re in doubt whether you can implement the whole entry point function until tomorrow night, then just go for a couple of features or even just one. That´s also why I think, you should strive for wrapping feature logic into a function of its own. It´s a matter of Evolvability and Production Efficiency. A function per feature makes the code more readable, since the language of requirements analysis and design is carried over into implementation. It makes it easier to apply changes to features because it´s clear where their logic is located. And finally, of course, it lets you re-use features in different context (read: increments). Feature functions make it easier for you to think of features as Spinning increments, to implement them independently, to let the product owner check them for acceptance individually. Increments consist of features, entry point functions consist of feature functions. So you can view software as a hierarchy of requirements from broad to thin which map to a hierarchy of functions - with entry points at the top.   I like this image of software as a self-similar structure on many levels of abstraction where requirements and code match each other. That to me is true agile design: the core tenet of Agility to move forward in increments is carried over into implementation. Increments on paper are retained in code. This way developers can easily relate to product owners. Elusive and fuzzy requirements are not tangible. Software production is moving forward through requirements one increment at a time, and one function at a time. In closing Product owners and developers are different - but they need to work together towards a shared goal: working software. So their notions of software need to be made compatible, they need to be connected. The increments of the product owner - user stories and features - need to be mapped straightforwardly to something which is relevant to developers. To me that´s functions. Yes, functions, not classes nor components nor micro services. We´re talking about behavior, actions, activities, processes. Their natural representation is a function. Something has to be done. Logic has to be executed. That´s the purpose of functions. Later, classes and other containers are needed to stay on top of a growing amount of logic. But to connect developers and product owners functions are the appropriate glue. Functions which represent increments. Can there always be such a small increment be found to deliver until tomorrow evening? I boldly say yes. Yes, it´s always possible. But maybe you´ve to start thinking differently. Maybe the product owner needs to start thinking differently. Completion is not the goal anymore. Neither is checking the delivery of an increment through the user interface of a software. Product owners need to become comfortable using test beds for certain features. If it´s hard to slice requirements thin enough for Spinning the reason is too little knowledge of something. Maybe you don´t yet understand the problem domain well enough? Maybe you don´t yet feel comfortable with some tool or technology? Then it´s time to acknowledge this fact. Be honest about your not knowing. And instead of trying to deliver as a craftsman officially become a researcher. Research an check back with the product owner every day - until your understanding has grown to a level where you are able to define the next Spinning increment. ? Sometimes even thin requirement slices will cover several Entry Points, like “Add validation of email addresses to all relevant dialogs.” Validation then will it put into a dozen functons. Still, though, it´s important to determine which Entry Points exactly get affected. That´s much easier, if strive for keeping the number of Entry Points per increment to 1. ? If you like call Entry Point functions event handlers, because that´s what they are. They all handle events of some kind, whether that´s palpable in your code or note. A public void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) {…} might look like an event handler to you, but public static void Main() {…} is one also - for then event “program started”. ?

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture: Quality Attributes

    Quality is what all software engineers should strive for when building a new system or adding new functionality. Dictonary.com ambiguously defines quality as a grade of excellence. Unfortunately, quality must be defined within the context of a situation in that each engineer must extract quality attributes from a project’s requirements. Because quality is defined by project requirements the meaning of quality is constantly changing base on the project. Software architecture factors that indicate the relevance and effectiveness The relevance and effectiveness of architecture can vary based on the context in which it was conceived and the quality attributes that are required to meet. Typically when evaluating architecture for a specific system regarding relevance and effectiveness the following questions should be asked.   Architectural relevance and effectiveness questions: Does the architectural concept meet the needs of the system for which it was designed? Out of the competing architectures for a system, which one is the most suitable? If we look at the first question regarding meeting the needs of a system for which it was designed. A system that answers yes to this question must meet all of its quality goals. This means that it consistently meets or exceeds performance goals for the system. In addition, the system meets all the other required system attributers based on the systems requirements. The suitability of a system is based on several factors. In order for a project to be suitable the necessary resources must be available to complete the task. Standard Project Resources: Money Trained Staff Time Life cycle factors that affect the system and design The development life cycle used on a project can drastically affect how a system’s architecture is created as well as influence its design. In the case of using the software development life cycle (SDLC) each phase must be completed before the next can begin.  This waterfall approach does not allow for changes in a system’s architecture after that phase is completed. This can lead to major system issues when the architecture for the system is not as optimal because of missed quality attributes. This can occur when a project has poor requirements and makes misguided architectural decisions to name a few examples. Once the architectural phase is complete the concepts established in this phase must move on to the design phase that is bound to use the concepts and guidelines defined in the previous phase regardless of any missing quality attributes needed for the project. If any issues arise during this phase regarding the selected architectural concepts they cannot be corrected during the current project. This directly has an effect on the design of a system because the proper qualities required for the project where not used when the architectural concepts were approved. When this is identified nothing can be done to fix the architectural issues and system design must use the existing architectural concepts regardless of its missing quality properties because the architectural concepts for the project cannot be altered. The decisions made in the design phase then preceded to fall down to the implementation phase where the actual system is coded based on the approved architectural concepts established in the architecture phase regardless of its architectural quality. Conversely projects using more of an iterative or agile methodology to implement a system has more flexibility to correct architectural decisions based on missing quality attributes. This is due to each phase of the SDLC is executed more than once so any issues identified in architecture of a system can be corrected in the next architectural phase. Subsequently the corresponding changes will then be adjusted in the following design phase so that when the project is completed the optimal architectural and design decision are applied to the solution. Architecture factors that indicate functional suitability Systems that have function shortcomings do not have the proper functionality based on the project’s driving quality attributes. What this means in English is that the system does not live up to what is required of it by the stakeholders as identified by the missing quality attributes and requirements. One way to prevent functional shortcomings is to test the project’s architecture, design, and implementation against the project’s driving quality attributes to ensure that none of the attributes were missed in any of the phases. Another way to ensure a system has functional suitability is to certify that all its requirements are fully articulated so that there is no chance for misconceptions or misinterpretations by all stakeholders. This will help prevent any issues regarding interpreting the system requirements during the initial architectural concept phase, design phase and implementation phase. Consider the applicability of other architectural models When considering an architectural model for a project is also important to consider other alternative architectural models to ensure that the model that is selected will meet the systems required functionality and high quality attributes. Recently I can remember talking about a project that I was working on and a coworker suggested a different architectural approach that I had never considered. This new model will allow for the same functionally that is offered by the existing model but will allow for a higher quality project because it fulfills more quality attributes. It is always important to seek alternatives prior to committing to an architectural model. Factors used to identify high-risk components A high risk component can be defined as a component that fulfills 2 or more quality attributes for a system. An example of this can be seen in a web application that utilizes a remote database. One high-risk component in this system is the TCIP component because it allows for HTTP connections to handle by a web server and as well as allows for the server to also connect to a remote database server so that it can import data into the system. This component allows for the assurance of data quality attribute and the accessibility quality attribute because the system is available on the network. If for some reason the TCIP component was to fail the web application would fail on two quality attributes accessibility and data assurance in that the web site is not accessible and data cannot be update as needed. Summary As stated previously, quality is what all software engineers should strive for when building a new system or adding new functionality. The quality of a system can be directly determined by how closely it is implemented when compared to its desired quality attributes. One way to insure a higher quality system is to enforce that all project requirements are fully articulated so that no assumptions or misunderstandings can be made by any of the stakeholders. By doing this a system has a better chance of becoming a high quality system based on its quality attributes

    Read the article

  • Juniper Strategy, LLC is hiring SharePoint Developers&hellip;

    - by Mark Rackley
    Isn’t everybody these days? It seems as though there are definitely more jobs than qualified devs these days, but yes, we are looking for a few good devs to help round out our burgeoning SharePoint team. Juniper Strategy is located in the DC area, however we will consider remote devs for the right fit. This is your chance to get in on the ground floor of a bright company that truly “gets it” when it comes to SharePoint, Project Management, and Information Assurance. We need like-minded people who “get it”, enjoy it, and who are looking for more than just a job. We have government and commercial opportunities as well as our own internal product that has a bright future of its own. Our immediate needs are for SharePoint .NET developers, but feel free to submit your resume for us to keep on file as it looks as though we’ll need several people in the coming months. Please email us your resume and salary requirements to [email protected] Below are our official job postings. Thanks for stopping by, we look forward to  hearing from you. Senior SharePoint .NET Developer Senior developer will focus on design and coding of custom, end-to-end business process solutions within the SharePoint framework. Senior developer with the ability to serve as a senior developer/mentor and manage day-to-day development tasks. Work with business consultants and clients to gather requirements to prepare business functional specifications. Analyze and recommend technical/development alternative paths based on business functional specifications. For selected development path, prepare technical specification and build the solution. Assist project manager with defining development task schedule and level-of-effort. Lead technical solution deployment. Job Requirements Minimum of 7 years experience in agile development, with at least 3 years of SharePoint-related development experience (SPS, SharePoint 2007/2010, WSS2-4). Thorough understanding of and demonstrated experience in development under the SharePoint Object Model, with focus on the WSS 3.0 foundation (MOSS 2007 Standard/Enterprise, Project Server 2007). Experience with using multiple data sources/repositories for database CRUD activities, including relational databases, SAP, Oracle e-Business. Experience with designing and deploying performance-based solutions in SharePoint for business processes that involve a very large number of records. Experience designing dynamic dashboards and mashups with data from multiple sources (internal to SharePoint as well as from external sources). Experience designing custom forms to facilitate user data entry, both with and without leveraging Forms Services. Experience building custom web part solutions. Experience with designing custom solutions for processing underlying business logic requirements including, but not limited to, SQL stored procedures, C#/ASP.Net workflows/event handlers (including timer jobs) to support multi-tiered decision trees and associated computations. Ability to create complex solution packages for deployment (e.g., feature-stapled site definitions). Must have impeccable communication skills, both written and verbal. Seeking a "tinkerer"; proactive with a thirst for knowledge (and a sense of humor). A US Citizen is required, and need to be able to pass NAC/E-Verify. An active Secret clearance is preferred. Applicants must pass a skills assessment test. MCP/MCTS or comparable certification preferred. Salary & Travel Negotiable SharePoint Project Lead Define project task schedule, work breakdown structure and level-of-effort. Serve as principal liaison to the customer to manage deliverables and expectations. Day-to-day project and team management, including preparation and maintenance of project plans, budgets, and status reports. Prepare technical briefings and presentation decks, provide briefs to C-level stakeholders. Work with business consultants and clients to gather requirements to prepare business functional specifications. Analyze and recommend technical/development alternative paths based on business functional specifications. The SharePoint Project Lead will be working with SharePoint architects and system owners to perform requirements/gap analysis and develop the underlying functional specifications. Once we have functional specifications as close to "final" as possible, the Project Lead will be responsible for preparation of the associated technical specification/development blueprint, along with assistance in preparing IV&V/test plan materials with support from other team members. This person will also be responsible for day-to-day management of "developers", but is also expected to engage in development directly as needed.  Job Requirements Minimum 8 years of technology project management across the software development life-cycle, with a minimum of 3 years of project management relating specifically to SharePoint (SPS 2003, SharePoint2007/2010) and/or Project Server. Thorough understanding of and demonstrated experience in development under the SharePoint Object Model, with focus on the WSS 3.0 foundation (MOSS 2007 Standard/Enterprise, Project Server 2007). Ability to interact and collaborate effectively with team members and stakeholders of different skill sets, personalities and needs. General "development" skill set required is a fundamental understanding of MOSS 2007 Enterprise, SP1/SP2, from the top-level of skinning to the core of the SharePoint object model. Impeccable communication skills, both written and verbal, and a sense of humor are required. The projects will require being at a client site at least 50% of the time in Washington DC (NW DC) and Maryland (near Suitland). A US Citizen is required, and need to be able to pass NAC/E-Verify. An active Secret clearance is preferred. PMP certification, PgMP preferred. Salary & Travel Negotiable

    Read the article

  • Product Search SEO

    - by dana
    I am a wondering if there is a recommended "best practice" for a product search SEO. I know to create a dynamic sitemap file that lists links to all products in the site. However, I want to implement a a bookmark-able "advanced search". Should I let search engines index any of the results? Take the following parameters for a search on a make believe used car website: minprice (minimum price in dollars) maxprice (maximum price in dollars) make (honda, audi, volvo) model (accord, A4, S40) minyear (minimum model year) maxyear (maximum model year) minmileage (minimum mileage) maxmileage (maximum mileage) Given these parameters, there could be an infinite number of search combinations: Price Between $10,000 and $20,000 /search?minprice=10000&maxprice&20000 Audis with less than 50k miles /search?model=audi&maxmileage=50000 More than 100,000 miles and less than $5,000 /search?minmileage=100000&maxprice=5000 etc. Over time, there may be inbound links to a variety of these types of searches, yet they are all slices of the same data. Should I allow for all of these searches to be indexed?

    Read the article

  • SEO for a list of products with filters

    - by dana
    I am a wondering if there is a recommended "best practice" for a product search SEO. I know to create a dynamic sitemap file that lists links to all products in the site. However, I want to implement a a bookmark-able "advanced search". Should I let search engines index any of the results? Take the following parameters for a search on a make believe used car website: minprice (minimum price in dollars) maxprice (maximum price in dollars) make (honda, audi, volvo) model (accord, A4, S40) minyear (minimum model year) maxyear (maximum model year) minmileage (minimum mileage) maxmileage (maximum mileage) Given these parameters, there could be an infinite number of search combinations: Price Between $10,000 and $20,000 /search?minprice=10000&maxprice&20000 Audis with less than 50k miles /search?model=audi&maxmileage=50000 More than 100,000 miles and less than $5,000 /search?minmileage=100000&maxprice=5000 etc. Over time, there may be inbound links to a variety of these types of searches, yet they are all slices of the same data. Should I allow for all of these searches to be indexed?

    Read the article

  • “Cloud Integration in Minutes” – True or False?

    - by Bruce Tierney
    The short answer is “yes”. Connecting on-premise and cloud applications “in minutes” is true…provided you only consider the connectivity subset of integration and have a small number of cloud integration touch points. At the recent Gartner AADI conference, 230 attendees filled up the Oracle session to get a more comprehensive answer to this question. During the session, titled “Simplifying Integration – The Cloud & Mobile Pre-requisite”, Oracle’s Tim Hall described cloud connectivity and then, equally importantly, the other essential and sometimes overlooked aspects of integration required to ensure a long term application and service integration strategy. To understand the challenges and opportunities faced by cloud integration, the session started off with a slide that describes how connectivity can quickly transition from simplicity to complexity as the number of applications and service vendor instances grows: Increased complexity puts increased demand on the integration platform As companies expand from on-premise applications into a hybrid on-premise/cloud infrastructure with support for mobile, cloud, and social, there is a new sense of urgency to implement a unified and comprehensive service integration platform. Without getting this unified platform in place, companies face increased complexity and cost managing a growing patchwork of niche integration toolsets as well as the disparate standards mandated by each SaaS vendor as shown in the image below: dddddddddddddddddddd Incomplete and overlapping offerings from a patchwork of niche vendors Also at Gartner AADI, Oracle SOA Suite customer Geeta Pyne, Director of Middleware at BMC presented their successful strategy on how BMC efficiently manages their cloud integration despite disparate requirements from each vendor. From one of Geeta’s slide: Interfaces are dictated by SaaS vendors; wide variety (SOAP, REST, Socket, HTTP/POX, SFTP); Flexibility of Oracle Service Bus/SOA Suite helps to support Every vendor has their way to handle Security; WS-Security, Custom Header; Support in Oracle Service Bus helps to adhere to disparate requirements At BMC, the flexibility of Oracle Service Bus and Oracle SOA Suite allowed them to support the wide variation in the functional requirements as mandated by their SaaS vendors. In contrast to the patchwork platform approach of escalating complexity from overlapping SaaS toolkits, Oracle’s strategy is to provide a unified platform to support disparate requirements from your SaaS vendors, on-premise apps, legacy apps, and more. Furthermore, Oracle SOA Suite includes the many aspects of comprehensive integration beyond basic connectivity including orchestration, analytics (BAM, events…), service virtualization and more in a single unified interface. Oracle SOA Suite – Unified and comprehensive To summarize, yes you can achieve “cloud integration in minutes” when considering the connectivity subset of integration but be sure to look for ways to simplify as you consider a more comprehensive view of integration beyond basic connectivity such as service virtualization, management, event processing and more. And finally, be sure your integration platform has the deep flexibility to handle the requirements of all your future SaaS applications…many of which are unknown to you now.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >