Search Results

Search found 5597 results on 224 pages for 'restful architecture'.

Page 22/224 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • Is a Model Driven Architecture in Language Oriented Programming (MPS) feasible at this time

    - by Steven Jeuris
    As a side project I am developing some sort of DSL where I describe a data model, and generate desired code files from it. I believe this is called Model Driven Architecture. My partial existing implementation uses C#, CodeDOM, XML and XSLT to do this manually. I discovered there already exist better environments to do this in. The one which fascinated me the most is called MPS, which follows the Language Oriented Programming paradigm. This article, written by a cofounder of JetBrains was a real eye opener for me. I truly believe LOP has a very good chance of becoming the next big programming paradigm once it has broader support. From my short experience with MPS, I noticed it is still mainly Java-oriented. My question is, how feasible is it to generate code files for other (multiple) languages instead of just Java. I don't need full language support from the start, so preferably, I need to be able to implement a language in a agile way. E.g. first support only one type, add access modifiers, ... Perhaps some other (free) environment already provides this out of the box. P.S.: I find it important to have a lot of control over the naming conventions and such of the generated code. This is one of the reasons why I started my own implementation.

    Read the article

  • Key ATG architecture principles

    - by Glen Borkowski
    Overview The purpose of this article is to describe some of the important foundational concepts of ATG.  This is not intended to cover all areas of the ATG platform, just the most important subset - the ones that allow ATG to be extremely flexible, configurable, high performance, etc.  For more information on these topics, please see the online product manuals. Modules The first concept is called the 'ATG Module'.  Simply put, you can think of modules as the building blocks for ATG applications.  The ATG development team builds the out of the box product using modules (these are the 'out of the box' modules).  Then, when a customer is implementing their site, they build their own modules that sit 'on top' of the out of the box ATG modules.  Modules can be very simple - containing minimal definition, and perhaps a small amount of configuration.  Alternatively, a module can be rather complex - containing custom logic, database schema definitions, configuration, one or more web applications, etc.  Modules generally will have dependencies on other modules (the modules beneath it).  For example, the Commerce Reference Store module (CRS) requires the DCS (out of the box commerce) module. Modules have a ton of value because they provide a way to decouple a customers implementation from the out of the box ATG modules.  This allows for a much easier job when it comes time to upgrade the ATG platform.  Modules are also a very useful way to group functionality into a single package which can be leveraged across multiple ATG applications. One very important thing to understand about modules, or more accurately, ATG as a whole, is that when you start ATG, you tell it what module(s) you want to start.  One of the first things ATG does is to look through all the modules you specified, and for each one, determine a list of modules that are also required to start (based on each modules dependencies).  Once this final, ordered list is determined, ATG continues to boot up.  One of the outputs from the ordered list of modules is that each module can contain it's own classes and configuration.  During boot, the ordered list of modules drives the unified classpath and configpath.  This is what determines which classes override others, and which configuration overrides other configuration.  Think of it as a layered approach. The structure of a module is well defined.  It simply looks like a folder in a filesystem that has certain other folders and files within it.  Here is a list of items that can appear in a module: MyModule: META-INF - this is required, along with a file called MANIFEST.MF which describes certain properties of the module.  One important property is what other modules this module depends on. config - this is typically present in most modules.  It defines a tree structure (folders containing properties files, XML, etc) that maps to ATG components (these are described below). lib - this contains the classes (typically in jarred format) for any code defined in this module j2ee - this is where any web-apps would be stored. src - in case you want to include the source code for this module, it's standard practice to put it here sql - if your module requires any additions to the database schema, you should place that schema here Here's a screenshots of a module: Modules can also contain sub-modules.  A dot-notation is used when referring to these sub-modules (i.e. MyModule.Versioned, where Versioned is a sub-module of MyModule). Finally, it is important to completely understand how modules work if you are going to be able to leverage them effectively.  There are many different ways to design modules you want to create, some approaches are better than others, especially if you plan to share functionality between multiple different ATG applications. Components A component in ATG can be thought of as a single item that performs a certain set of related tasks.  An example could be a ProductViews component - used to store information about what products the current customer has viewed.  Components have properties (also called attributes).  The ProductViews component could have properties like lastProductViewed (stores the ID of the last product viewed) or productViewList (stores the ID's of products viewed in order of their being viewed).  The previous examples of component properties would typically also offer get and set methods used to retrieve and store the property values.  Components typically will also offer other types of useful methods aside from get and set.  In the ProductViewed component, we might want to offer a hasViewed method which will tell you if the customer has viewed a certain product or not. Components are organized in a tree like hierarchy called 'nucleus'.  Nucleus is used to locate and instantiate ATG Components.  So, when you create a new ATG component, it will be able to be found 'within' nucleus.  Nucleus allows ATG components to reference one another - this is how components are strung together to perform meaningful work.  It's also a mechanism to prevent redundant configuration - define it once and refer to it from everywhere. Here is a screenshot of a component in nucleus:  Components can be extremely simple (i.e. a single property with a get method), or can be rather complex offering many properties and methods.  To be an ATG component, a few things are required: a class - you can reference an existing out of the box class or you could write your own a properties file - this is used to define your component the above items must be located 'within' nucleus by placing them in the correct spot in your module's config folder Within the properties file, you will need to point to the class you want to use: $class=com.mycompany.myclass You may also want to define the scope of the class (request, session, or global): $scope=session In summary, ATG Components live in nucleus, generally have links to other components, and provide some meaningful type of work.  You can configure components as well as extend their functionality by writing code. Repositories Repositories (a.k.a. Data Anywhere Architecture) is the mechanism that ATG uses to access data primarily stored in relational databases, but also LDAP or other backend systems.  ATG applications are required to be very high performance, and data access is critical in that if not handled properly, it could create a bottleneck.  ATG's repository functionality has been around for a long time - it's proven to be extremely scalable.  Developers new to ATG need to understand how repositories work as this is a critical aspect of the ATG architecture.   Repositories essentially map relational tables to objects in ATG, as well as handle caching.  ATG defines many repositories out of the box (i.e. user profile, catalog, orders, etc), and this is comprised of both the underlying database schema along with the associated repository definition files (XML).  It is fully expected that implementations will extend / change the out of the box repository definitions, so there is a prescribed approach to doing this.  The first thing to be sure of is to encapsulate your repository definition additions / changes within your own module (as described above).  The other important best practice is to never modify the out of the box schema - in other words, don't add columns to existing ATG tables, just create your own new tables.  These will help ensure you can easily upgrade your application at a later date. xml-combination As mentioned earlier, when you start ATG, the order of the modules will determine the final configpath.  Files within this configpath are 'layered' such that modules on top can override configuration of modules below it.  This is the same concept for repository definition files.  If you want to add a few properties to the out of the box user profile, you simply need to create an XML file containing only your additions, and place it in the correct location in your module.  At boot time, your definition will be combined (hence the term xml-combination) with the lower, out of the box modules, with the result being a user profile that contains everything (out of the box, plus your additions).  Aside from just adding properties, there are also ways to remove and change properties. types of properties Aside from the normal 'database backed' properties, there are a few other interesting types: transient properties - these are properties that are in memory, but not backed by any database column.  These are useful for temporary storage. java-backed properties - by nature, these are transient, but in addition, when you access this property (by called the get method) instead of looking up a piece of data, it performs some logic and returns the results.  'Age' is a good example - if you're storing a birth date on the profile, but your business rules are defined in terms of someones age, you could create a simple java-backed property to look at the birth date and compare it to the current date, and return the persons age. derived properties - this is what allows for inheritance within the repository structure.  You could define a property at the category level, and have the product inherit it's value as well as override it.  This is useful for setting defaults, with the ability to override. caching There are a number of different caching modes which are useful at different times depending on the nature of the data being cached.  For example, the simple cache mode is useful for things like user profiles.  This is because the user profile will typically only be used on a single instance of ATG at one time.  Simple cache mode is also useful for read-only types of data such as the product catalog.  Locked cache mode is useful when you need to ensure that only one ATG instance writes to a particular item at a time - an example would be a customers order.  There are many options in terms of configuring caching which are outside the scope of this article - please refer to the product manuals for more details. Other important concepts - out of scope for this article There are a whole host of concepts that are very important pieces to the ATG platform, but are out of scope for this article.  Here's a brief description of some of them: formhandlers - these are ATG components that handle form submissions by users. pipelines - these are configurable chains of logic that are used for things like handling a request (request pipeline) or checking out an order. special kinds of repositories (versioned, files, secure, ...) - there are a couple different types of repositories that are used in various situations.  See the manuals for more information. web development - JSP/ DSP tag library - ATG provides a traditional approach to developing web applications by providing a tag library called the DSP library.  This library is used throughout your JSP pages to interact with all the ATG components. messaging - a message sub-system used as another way for components to interact. personalization - ability for business users to define a personalized user experience for customers.  See the other blog posts related to personalization.

    Read the article

  • Podcast Show Notes: The Fusion Middleware A-Team and the Chronicles of Architecture

    - by Bob Rhubart
    If you pay any attention at all to the Oracle blogosphere you’ve probably seen one of several blogs published by members of a group known as the Oracle Fusion Middleware A-Team. A new blog, The Oracle A-Team Chronicles, was recently launched that combines all of those separate A-Team blogs in one. In this program you’ll meet some of the people behind the A-team and the creation of that new blog. The Conversation Listen to Part 1: Background on the A-Team - When was it formed? What is it’s mission? 54) What are some of the most common challenges A-Team architects encounter in the field? Listen to Part 2 (July 3): The panel discusses the trends - big data, mobile, social, etc - that are having the biggest impact in the field. Listen to Part 3 (July 10): The panelists discuss the analysts, journalists, and other resources they rely on to stay ahead of the curve as the technology evolves, and reveal the last article or blog post they shared with other A-team members. The Panelists Jennifer Briscoe: Senior Director, Oracle Fusion Middleware A-Team Clifford Musante: Lead Architect, Application Integration Architecture A-Team, webmaster of the A-Team Chronicles Mikael Ottosson: Vice President, Oracle Fusion Apps and Fusion Middleware A-Team and Cloud Applications Group Pardha Reddy: Senior director of Oracle Identity Management and a member of the Oracle Fusion Middleware A-team Coming Soon Data Warehousing and Oracle Data Integrator: Guest producer and Oracle ACE Director Gurcan Orhan selected the topic and panelists for this program, which also features Uli Bethke, Michael Rainey, and Oracle ACE Cameron Lackpour. Java and Oracle ADF Mobile: An impromptu roundtable discussion featuring QCon New York 2013 session speakers Doug Clarke, Frederic Desbiens, Stephen Chin, and Reza Rahman. Stay tuned:

    Read the article

  • Need some critique on .NET/WCF SOA architecture plan

    - by user998101
    I am working on a refactoring of some services and would appreciate some critique on my general approach. I am working with three back-end data systems and need to expose an authenticated front-end API over http binding, JSON, and REST for internal apps as well as 3rd party integration. I've got a rough idea below that's a hybrid of what I have and where I intend to wind up. I intend to build guidance extensions to support this architecture so that devs can build this out quickly. Here's the current idea for our structure: Front-end WCF routing service (spread across multiple IIS servers via hardware load balancer) Load balancing of services behind routing is handled within routing service, probably round-robin One of the services will be a token Multiple bindings per-service exposed to address JSON, REST, and whatever else comes up later All in/out is handled via POCO DTOs Use unity to scan for what services are available and expose them The front-end services behind the routing service do nothing more than expose the API and do conversion of DTO<-Entity Unity inject service implementation to allow mocking automapper for DTO/Entity conversion Invoke WF services where response required immediately Queue to ESB for async WF -- ESB will invoke WF later Business logic WF layer Expose same api as front-end services Implement business logic Wrap transaction context where needed Call out to composite/atomic services Composite/Atomic Services Exposed as WCF One service per back-end system Standard atomic CRUD operations plus composite operations Supports transaction context The questions I have are: Are the separation of concerns outlined above beneficial? Current thought is each layer below is its own project, except the backend stuff, where each system gets one project. The project has a servicehost and all the services are under a services folder. Interfaces live in a separate project at each layer. DTO and Entities are in two separate projects under a shared folder. I am currently planning to build dedicated services for shared functionality such as logging and overload things like tracelistener to call those services. Is this a valid approach? Any other suggestions/comments?

    Read the article

  • How to create an "edit" url for a restful resouce?

    - by Freewind
    In my partial template, there is a varible named "resource", it may be a question or an answer. I want to build a link to edit it, but when I use it, I don't know what it is, so I can't write: <%=link_to 'edit', edit_question_url(resource)%> or <%=link_to 'edit', edit_answer_url(resource)%> I wonder if there is such a method, say "url_for_edit()", can be used as: <%=link_to 'edit', url_for_edit(resource)%> Is there such a method?

    Read the article

  • What would be the wisest choice for a new .Net RESTful web service?

    - by Phil.Wheeler
    I want to write my first REST web service using the .Net framework. I've seen fairly passionate comments from various people about which is best and have even found some differing comments from Microsoft. My web service should be fairly simple: I want to expose bus timetable information. I figure the resources I will be concerned about are Fares Timetables (routes, stops) What would be the most appropriate (i.e. not necessarily the easiest, most fun or your personal preference) technology to use out of WCF, ADO.NET Data Services or ASP.Net MVC?

    Read the article

  • .Net MVC - Restful URL's - The specified path, file name, or both are too long. The fully qualified

    - by Truegilly
    Hello, im creating a MVC application thats following a restfull URL approach Im am experiencing the following error... "The specified path, file name, or both are too long. The fully qualified file name must be less than 260 characters, and the directory name must be less than 248 characters." This error occurs when my URL length = 225 chars. Surly I can have much longer URL's without this problem and doesn’t this relate to file paths rather than URL's ? Im sure some of you MVC guys have experienced this ;) is there a way round it ?? where am i going wrong ?? thank you for your time Truegilly

    Read the article

  • Is it wrong to get feedback from Stack Overflow on a live system architecture?

    - by hal10001
    I am the technical director at a startup, and I will eventually be tasked with implementing a "real" system architecture when we hire more programmers. Right now our clients are small enough, and it is just me, so documented deployments, source control, unit tests and quality assurance servers are non-existent. Eventually I will need to devise a work-flow and architecture patterns for the majority of the work we will do (e-commerce). If I posted an architecture diagram, and asked for feedback, would that be a misuse of the Stack Overflow system? I don't want to get into that battle of "hey, don't ask us to do your job for you", but the reality is that any programmer who eventually moves into this realm will have to figure it out with feedback from other developers. HighScalability.com is what comes to mind when I think about this sorta thing in terms of the knowledge I need. So if this is not the right kind of forum for that, then any book recommendations or white papers you can recommend would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of plug-in based architecture?

    - by RP
    I want to do the architectural design for a software that can be used integrate various third party software’s (executable) under one platform. Standard project types will be added to the platform by default. The project type defines the way in which the different software will be executed and their input and output files. The user can customize the available standard project type and that will be added to the platform as new project type which defines new custom execution flow. Also it should support easy extension and customization of the features. I read that plug-in based architecture supports both. What are the advantages and disadvantages of plug-in based architecture? Do we have any better architecture which can be used for this kind of scenario? Thanks in advance:)

    Read the article

  • Push-Based Events in a Services Oriented Architecture

    - by Colin Morelli
    I have come to a point, in building a services oriented architecture (on top of Thrift), that I need to expose events and allow listeners. My initial thought was, "create an EventService" to handle publishing and subscribing to events. That EventService can use whatever implementation it desires to actually distribute the events. My client automatically round-robins service requests to available service hosts which are determined using Zookeeper-based service discovery. So, I'd probably use JMS inside of EventService mainly for the purpose of persisting messages (in the event that a service host for EventService goes down before it can distribute the message to all of the available listeners). When I started considering this, I began looking into the differences between Queues and Topics. Topics unfortunately won't work for me, because (at least for now), all listeners must receive the message (even if they were down at the time the event was pushed, or hadn't made a subscription yet because they haven't completed startup (during deployment, for example) - messages should be queued until the service is available). However, I don't want EventService to be responsible for handling all of the events. I don't think it should have the code to react to events inside of it. Each of the services should do what it needs with a given event. This would indicate that each service would need a JMS connection, which questions the value of having EventService at all (as the services could individually publish and subscribe to JMS directly). However, it also couples all of the services to JMS (when I'd rather that there be a single service that's responsible for determining how to distribute events). What I had thought was to publish an event to EventService, which pulls a configuration of listeners from some configuration source (database, flat file, irrelevant for now). It replicates the message and pushes each one back into a queue with information specific to that listener (so, if there are 3 listeners, 1 event would become 3 events in JMS). Then, another thread in EventService (which is replicated, running on multiple hots) would be pulling from the queue, attempting to make the service call to the "listener", and returning the message to the queue (if the service is down), or discarding the message (if the listener completed successfully). tl;dr If I have an EventService that is responsible for receiving events and delegating service calls to "event listeners," (which are really just endpoints on other services), how should it know how to craft the service call? Should I create a generic "Event" object that is shared among all services? Then, the EventService can just construct this object and pass it to the service call. Or is there a better answer to this problem entirely?

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM)

    Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM) is a methodology used to determine how specific application quality attributes were achieved and how possible changes in the future will affect quality attributes based on hypothetical cases studies. Common quality attributes that can be utilized by this methodology include modifiability, robustness, portability, and extensibility. Quality Attribute: Application Modifiability The Modifiability quality attribute refers to how easy it changing the system in the future will be. This to me is a very open-ended attribute because a business could decide to transform a Point of Sale (POS) system in to a Lead Tracking system overnight. (Yes, this did actually happen to me) In order for SAAM to be properly applied for checking this attribute specific hypothetical case studies need to be created and review for the modifiability attribute due to the fact that various scenarios would return various results based on the amount of changes. In the case of the POS change out a payment gateway or adding an additional payment would have scored very high in comparison to changing the system over to a lead management system. I personally would evaluate this quality attribute based on the S.O.I.L.D Principles of software design. I have found from my experience the use of S.O.I.L.D in software design allows for the adoption of changes within a system. Quality Attribute: Application Robustness The Robustness quality attribute refers to how an application handles the unexpected. The unexpected can be defined but is not limited to anything not anticipated in the originating design of the system. For example: Bad Data, Limited to no network connectivity, invalid permissions, or any unexpected application exceptions. I would personally evaluate this quality attribute based on how the system handled the exceptions. Robustness Considerations Did the system stop or did it handle the unexpected error? Did the system log the unexpected error for future debugging? What message did the user receive about the error? Quality Attribute: Application Portability The Portability quality attribute refers to the ease of porting an application to run in a new operating system or device. For example, It is much easier to alter an ASP.net website to be accessible by a PC, Mac, IPhone, Android Phone, Mini PC, or Table in comparison to desktop application written in VB.net because a lot more work would be involved to get the desktop app to the point where it would be viable to port the application over to the various environments and devices. I would personally evaluate this quality attribute based on each new environment for which the hypothetical case study identifies. I would pay particular attention to the following items. Portability Considerations Hardware Dependencies Operating System Dependencies Data Source Dependencies Network Dependencies and Availabilities  Quality Attribute: Application Extensibility The Extensibility quality attribute refers to the ease of adding new features to an existing application without impacting existing functionality. I would personally evaluate this quality attribute based on each new environment for the following Extensibility  Considerations Hard coded Variables versus Configurable variables Application Documentation (External Documents and Codebase Documentation.) The use of Solid Design Principles

    Read the article

  • BizTalk 2009 - Architecture Decisions

    - by StuartBrierley
    In the first step towards implementing a BizTalk 2009 environment, from development through to live, I put forward a proposal that detailed the options available, as well as the costs and benefits associated with these options, to allow an informed discusion to take place with the business drivers and budget holders of the project.  This ultimately lead to a decision being made to implement an initial BizTalk Server 2009 environment using the Standard Edition of the product. It is my hope that in the long term, as projects require it and allow, we will be looking to implement my ideal recommendation of a multi-server enterprise level environment, but given the differences in cost and the likely initial work load for the environment this was not something that I could fully recommend at this time.  However, it must be noted that this decision was made in full awareness of the limits of the standard edition, and the business drivers of this project were made fully aware of the risks associated with running without the failover capabilities of the enterprise edition. When considering the creation of this new BizTalk Server 2009 environment, I have also recommended the creation of the following pre-production environments:   Usage Environment Development Development of solutions; Unit testing against technical specifications; Initial load testing; Testing of deployment packages;  Visual Studio; BizTalk; SQL; Client PCs/Laptops; Server environment similar to Live implementation; Test Testing of Solutions against business and technical requirements;  BizTalk; SQL; Server environment similar to Live implementation; Pseudo-Live As Live environment to allow testing against Live implementation; Acts as back-up hardware in case of failure of Live environment; BizTalk; SQL; Server environment identical to Live implementation; The creation of these differing environments allows for the separation of the various stages of the development cycle.  The development environment is for use when actively developing a solution, it is a potentially volatile environment whose state at any given time can not be guaranteed.  It allows developers to carry out initial tests in an environment that is similar to the live environment and also provides an area for the testing of deployment packages prior to any release to the test environment. The test environment is intended to be a semi-volatile environment that is similar to the live environment.  It will change periodically through the development of a solution (or solutions) but should be otherwise stable.  It allows for the continued testing of a solution against requirements without the worry that the environment is being actively changed by any ongoing development.  This separation of development and test is crucial in ensuring the quality and control of the tested solution. The pseudo-live environment should be considered to be an almost static environment.  It should mimic the live environment and can act as back up hardware in the case of live failure.  This environment acts as an area to allow for “as live” testing, where the performance and behaviour of the live solutions can be replicated.  There should be relatively few changes to this environment, with software releases limited to “release candidate” level releases prior to going live. Whereas the pseudo-live environment should always mimic the live environment, to save on costs the development and test servers could be implemented on lower specification hardware.  Consideration can also be given to the use of a virtual server environment to further reduce hardware costs in the development and test environments, indeed this virtual approach can also be extended to pseudo-live and live assuming the underlying technology is in place. Although there is no requirement for the development and test server environments to be identical to live, the overriding architecture implemented should be the same as in live and an understanding must be gained of the performance differences to be expected across the different environments.

    Read the article

  • What is the relationship between Turing Machine & Modern Computer ? [closed]

    - by smwikipedia
    I heard a lot that modern computers are based on Turing machine. I just cannot build a bridge between a conceptual Turing Machine and a modern computer. Could someone help me build this bridge? Below is my current understanding. I think the computer is a big general-purpose Turing machine. Each program we write is a small specific-purpose Turing machine. The classical Turing machine do its job based on the input and its current state inside and so do our programs. Let's take a running program (a process) as an example. We know that in the process's address space, there's areas for stack, heap, and code. A classical Turing machine doesn't have the ability to remember many things, so we borrow the concept of stack from the push-down automaton. The heap and stack areas contains the state of our specific-purpose Turing machine (our program). The code area represents the logic of this small Turing machine. And various I/O devices supply input to this Turing machine.

    Read the article

  • Turing Machine & Modern Computer

    - by smwikipedia
    I heard a lot that modern computers are based on Turing machine. I'd like to share my understanding and hear your comments. I think the computer is a big general-purpose Turing machine. Each program we write is a small specific-purpose Turing machine. The classical Turing machine do its job based on the input and its current state inside and so do our programs. Let's take a running program (a process) as an example. We know that in the process's address space, there's areas for stack, heap, and code. A classical Turing machine doesn't have the ability to remember many things, so we borrow the concept of stack from the push-down automaton. The heap and stack areas contains the state of our specific-purpose Turing machine (our program). The code area represents the logic of this small Turing machine. And various I/O devices supply input to this Turing machine. The above is my naive understanding about the working paradigm of modern computer. I couln't wait to hear your comments. Thanks very much.

    Read the article

  • EPM 11.1.2.2 Architecture: Financial Performance Management Applications

    - by Marc Schumacher
     Financial Management can be accessed either by a browser based client or by SmartView. Starting from release 11.1.2.2, the Financial Management Windows client does not longer access the Financial Management Consolidation server. All tasks that require an on line connection (e.g. load and extract tasks) can only be done using the web interface. Any client connection initiated by a browser or SmartView is send to the Oracle HTTP server (OHS) first. Based on the path given (e.g. hfmadf, hfmofficeprovider) in the URL, OHS makes a decision to forward this request either to the new Financial Management web application based on the Oracle Application Development Framework (ADF) or to the .NET based application serving SmartView retrievals running on Internet Information Server (IIS). Any requests send to the ADF web interface that need to be processed by the Financial Management application server are send to the IIS using HTTP protocol and will be forwarded further using DCOM to the Financial Management application server. SmartView requests, which are processes by IIS in first row, are forwarded to the Financial Management application server using DCOM as well. The Financial Management Application Server uses OLE DB database connections via native database clients to talk to the Financial Management database schema. Communication between the Financial Management DME Listener, which handles requests from EPMA, and the Financial Management application server is based on DCOM.  Unlike most other components Essbase Analytics Link (EAL) does not have an end user interface. The only user interface is a plug-in for the Essbase Administration Services console, which is used for administration purposes only. End users interact with a Transparent or Replicated Partition that is created in Essbase and populated with data by EAL. The Analytics Link Server deployed on WebLogic communicates through HTTP protocol with the Analytics Link Financial Management Connector that is deployed in IIS on the Financial Management web server. Analytics Link Server interacts with the Data Synchronisation server using the EAL API. The Data Synchronization server acts as a target of a Transparent or Replicated Partition in Essbase and uses a native database client to connect to the Financial Management database. Analytics Link Server uses JDBC to connect to relational repository databases and Essbase JAPI to connect to Essbase.  As most Oracle EPM System products, browser based clients and SmartView can be used to access Planning. The Java based Planning web application is deployed on WebLogic, which is configured behind an Oracle HTTP Server (OHS). Communication between Planning and the Planning RMI Registry Service is done using Java Remote Message Invocation (RMI). Planning uses JDBC to access relational repository databases and talks to Essbase using the CAPI. Be aware of the fact that beside the Planning System database a dedicated database schema is needed for each application that is set up within Planning.  As Planning, Profitability and Cost Management (HPCM) has a pretty simple architecture. Beside the browser based clients and SmartView, a web service consumer can be used as a client too. All clients access the Java based web application deployed on WebLogic through Oracle HHTP Server (OHS). Communication between Profitability and Cost Management and EPMA Web Server is done using HTTP protocol. JDBC is used to access the relational repository databases as well as data sources. Essbase JAPI is utilized to talk to Essbase.  For Strategic Finance, two clients exist, SmartView and a Windows client. While SmartView communicates through the web layer to the Strategic Finance Server, Strategic Finance Windows client makes a direct connection to the Strategic Finance Server using RPC calls. Connections from Strategic Finance Web as well as from Strategic Finance Web Services to the Strategic Finance Server are made using RPC calls too. The Strategic Finance Server uses its own file based data store. JDBC is used to connect to the EPM System Registry from web and application layer.  Disclosure Management has three kinds of clients. While the browser based client and SmartView interact with the Disclosure Management web application directly through Oracle HTTP Server (OHS), Taxonomy Designer does not connect to the Disclosure Management server. Communication to relational repository databases is done via JDBC, to connect to Essbase the Essbase JAPI is utilized.

    Read the article

  • Resources how to architect a iPhone application?

    - by Frank Martin
    What resources can you recommend for learning how to architect a iPhone application? Background of the question is that most of the resources explain the usage of a single class or concept (and i appreciate that a lot to learn something about the specific topic) but as far as i can see they lack unfortunately to describe how to put things together for typical real world applications.

    Read the article

  • Why do so many APIs boast about being RESTful?

    - by John Hoffman
    I have noticed that many APIs I have encountered such as Facebook's old API and Skydrive's API boast about being RESTful. Hence, I looked up what REST means on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_state_transfer), but I don't understand why do APIs boast about being RESTful. Doesn't RESTful just mean that an API works via communications across the web such as via HTTP? What's the big deal? This sounds like any API that relies on third-parties.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET WebAPI Security 2: Identity Architecture

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    Pedro has beaten me to the punch with a detailed post (and diagram) about the WebAPI hosting architecture. So go read his post first, then come back so we can have a closer look at what that means for security. The first important takeaway is that WebAPI is hosting independent-  currently it ships with two host integration implementations – one for ASP.NET (aka web host) and WCF (aka self host). Pedro nicely shows the integration into the web host. Self hosting is not done yet so we will mainly focus on the web hosting case and I will point out security related differences when they exist. The interesting part for security (amongst other things of course) is the HttpControllerHandler (see Pedro’s diagram) – this is where the host specific representation of an HTTP request gets converted to the WebAPI abstraction (called HttpRequestMessage). The ConvertRequest method does the following: Create a new HttpRequestMessage. Copy URI, method and headers from the HttpContext. Copies HttpContext.User to the Properties<string, object> dictionary on the HttpRequestMessage. The key used for that can be found on HttpPropertyKeys.UserPrincipalKey (which resolves to “MS_UserPrincipal”). So the consequence is that WebAPI receives whatever IPrincipal has been set by the ASP.NET pipeline (in the web hosting case). Common questions are: Are there situations where is property does not get set? Not in ASP.NET – the DefaultAuthenticationModule in the HTTP pipeline makes sure HttpContext.User (and Thread.CurrentPrincipal – more on that later) are always set. Either to some authenticated user – or to an anonymous principal. This may be different in other hosting environments (again more on that later). Why so generic? Keep in mind that WebAPI is hosting independent and may run on a host that materializes identity completely different compared to ASP.NET (or .NET in general). This gives them a way to evolve the system in the future. How does WebAPI code retrieve the current client identity? HttpRequestMessage has an extension method called GetUserPrincipal() which returns the property as an IPrincipal. A quick look at self hosting shows that the moral equivalent of HttpControllerHandler.ConvertRequest() is HttpSelfHostServer.ProcessRequestContext(). Here the principal property gets only set when the host is configured for Windows authentication (inconsisteny). Do I like that? Well – yes and no. Here are my thoughts: I like that it is very straightforward to let WebAPI inherit the client identity context of the host. This might not always be what you want – think of an ASP.NET app that consists of UI and APIs – the UI might use Forms authentication, the APIs token based authentication. So it would be good if the two parts would live in a separate security world. It makes total sense to have this generic hand off point for identity between the host and WebAPI. It also makes total sense for WebAPI plumbing code (especially handlers) to use the WebAPI specific identity abstraction. But – c’mon we are running on .NET. And the way .NET represents identity is via IPrincipal/IIdentity. That’s what every .NET developer on this planet is used to. So I would like to see a User property of type IPrincipal on ApiController. I don’t like the fact that Thread.CurrentPrincipal is not populated. T.CP is a well established pattern as a one stop shop to retrieve client identity on .NET.  That makes a lot of sense – even if the name is misleading at best. There might be existing library code you want to call from WebAPI that makes use of T.CP (e.g. PrincipalPermission, or a simple .Name or .IsInRole()). Having the client identity as an ambient property is useful for code that does not have access to the current HTTP request (for calling GetUserPrincipal()). I don’t like the fact that that the client identity conversion from host to WebAPI is inconsistent. This makes writing security plumbing code harder. I think the logic should always be: If the host has a client identity representation, copy it. If not, set an anonymous principal on the request message. Btw – please don’t annoy me with the “but T.CP is static, and static is bad for testing” chant. T.CP is a getter/setter and, in fact I find it beneficial to be able to set different security contexts in unit tests before calling in some logic. And, in case you have wondered – T.CP is indeed thread static (and the name comes from a time where a logical operation was bound to a thread – which is not true anymore). But all thread creation APIs in .NET actually copy T.CP to the new thread they create. This is the case since .NET 2.0 and is certainly an improvement compared to how Win32 does things. So to sum it up: The host plumbing copies the host client identity to WebAPI (this is not perfect yet, but will surely be improved). or in other words: The current WebAPI bits don’t ship with any authentication plumbing, but solely use whatever authentication (and thus client identity) is set up by the host. WebAPI developers can retrieve the client identity from the HttpRequestMessage. Hopefully my proposed changes around T.CP and the User property on ApiController will be added. In the next post, I will detail how to add WebAPI specific authentication support, e.g. for Basic Authentication and tokens. This includes integrating the notion of claims based identity. After that we will look at the built-in authorization bits and how to improve them as well. Stay tuned.

    Read the article

  • Trying to compile x264 and ffmpeg for iPhone - "missing required architecture arm in file"

    - by jtrim
    I'm trying to compile x264 for use in an iPhone application. I see there are instructions on how to compile ffmpeg for use on the platform here: http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2009-October/076618.html , but I can't seem to find anything this complete for compiling x264 on the iPhone. I've found this source tree: http://gitorious.org/x264-arm that seems to have support for the ARM platform. Here is my config line: ./configure --cross-prefix=/usr/bin/ --host=arm-apple-darwin10 --extra-cflags="-B /Developer/Platforms/iPhoneOS.platform/Developer/SDKs/iPhoneOS3.2.sdk/usr/lib/ -I /Developer/Platforms/iPhoneOS.platform/Developer/SDKs/iPhoneOS3.2.sdk/usr/lib/" ...and inside configure I'm using the gas-preprocessor script (first link above) as my assembler: gas-preprocessor.pl gcc When I start compiling, it chunks away for a little while, then it spits out these warnings and a huge list of undefined symbols: ld: warning: option -s is obsolete and being ignored ld: warning: -force_cpusubtype_ALL will become unsupported for ARM architectures ld: warning: in /usr/lib/crt1.o, missing required architecture arm in file ld: warning: in /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.dylib, missing required architecture arm in file ld: warning: in /usr/lib/libm.dylib, missing required architecture arm in file ld: warning: in /usr/lib/libpthread.dylib, missing required architecture arm in file ld: warning: in /usr/lib/libgcc_s.1.dylib, missing required architecture arm in file ld: warning: in /usr/lib/libSystem.dylib, missing required architecture arm in file Undefined symbols: My guess would be that the problem has to do with the "missing required architecture arm in file" warning...any ideas?

    Read the article

  • BizTalk: History of one project architecture

    - by Leonid Ganeline
    "In the beginning God made heaven and earth. Then he started to integrate." At the very start was the requirement: integrate two working systems. Small digging up: It was one system. It was good but IT guys want to change it to the new one, much better, chipper, more flexible, and more progressive in technologies, more suitable for the future, for the faster world and hungry competitors. One thing. One small, little thing. We cannot turn off the old system (call it A, because it was the first), turn on the new one (call it B, because it is second but not the last one). The A has a hundreds users all across a country, they must study B. A still has a lot nice custom features, home-made features that cannot disappear. These features have to be moved to the B and it is a long process, months and months of redevelopment. So, the decision was simple. Let’s move not jump, let’s both systems working side-by-side several months. In this time we could teach the users and move all custom A’s special functionality to B. That automatically means both systems should work side-by-side all these months and use the same data. Data in A and B must be in sync. That’s how the integration projects get birth. Moreover, the specific of the user tasks requires the both systems must be in sync in real-time. Nightly synchronization is not working, absolutely.   First draft The first draft seems simple. Both systems keep data in SQL databases. When data changes, the Create, Update, Delete operations performed on the data, and the sync process could be started. The obvious decision is to use triggers on tables. When we are talking about data, we are talking about several entities. For example, Orders and Items [in Orders]. We decided to use the BizTalk Server to synchronize systems. Why it was chosen is another story. Second draft   Let’s take an example how it works in more details. 1.       User creates a new entity in the A system. This fires an insert trigger on the entity table. Trigger has to pass the message “Entity created”. This message includes all attributes of the new entity, but I focused on the Id of this entity in the A system. Notation for this message is id.A. System A sends id.A to the BizTalk Server. 2.       BizTalk transforms id.A to the format of the system B. This is easiest part and I will not focus on this kind of transformations in the following text. The message on the picture is still id.A but it is in slightly different format, that’s why it is changing in color. BizTalk sends id.A to the system B. 3.       The system B creates the entity on its side. But it uses different id-s for entities, these id-s are id.B. System B saves id.A+id.B. System B sends the message id.A+id.B back to the BizTalk. 4.       BizTalk sends the message id.A+id.B to the system A. 5.       System A saves id.A+id.B. Why both id-s should be saved on both systems? It was one of the next requirements. Users of both systems have to know the systems are in sync or not in sync. Users working with the entity on the system A can see the id.B and use it to switch to the system B and work there with the copy of the same entity. The decision was to store the pairs of entity id-s on both sides. If there is only one id, the entities are not in sync yet (for the Create operation). Third draft Next problem was the reliability of the synchronization. The synchronizing process can be interrupted on each step, when message goes through the wires. It can be communication problem, timeout, temporary shutdown one of the systems, the second system cannot be synchronized by some internal reason. There were several potential problems that prevented from enclosing the whole synchronization process in one transaction. Decision was to restart the whole sync process if it was not finished (in case of the error). For this purpose was created an additional service. Let’s call it the Resync service. We still keep the id pairs in both systems, but only for the fast access not for the synchronization process. For the synchronizing these id-s now are kept in one main place, in the Resync service database. The Resync service keeps record as: ·       Id.A ·       Id.B ·       Entity.Type ·       Operation (Create, Update, Delete) ·       IsSyncStarted (true/false) ·       IsSyncFinished (true/false0 The example now looks like: 1.       System A creates id.A. id.A is saved on the A. Id.A is sent to the BizTalk. 2.       BizTalk sends id.A to the Resync and to the B. id.A is saved on the Resync. 3.       System B creates id.B. id.A+id.B are saved on the B. id.A+id.B are sent to the BizTalk. 4.       BizTalk sends id.A+id.B to the Resync and to the A. id.A+id.B are saved on the Resync. 5.       id.A+id.B are saved on the B. Resync changes the IsSyncStarted and IsSyncFinished flags accordingly. The Resync service implements three main methods: ·       Save (id.A, Entity.Type, Operation) ·       Save (id.A, id.B, Entity.Type, Operation) ·       Resync () Two Save() are used to save id-s to the service storage. See in the above example, in 2 and 4 steps. What about the Resync()? It is the method that finishes the interrupted synchronization processes. If Save() is started by the trigger event, the Resync() is working as an independent process. It periodically scans the Resync storage to find out “unfinished” records. Then it restarts the synchronization processes. It tries to synchronize them several times then gives up.     One more thing, both systems A and B must tolerate duplicates of one synchronizing process. Say on the step 3 the system B was not able to send id.A+id.B back. The Resync service must restart the synchronization process that will send the id.A to B second time. In this case system B must just send back again also created id.A+id.B pair without errors. That means “tolerate duplicates”. Fourth draft Next draft was created only because of the aesthetics. As it always happens, aesthetics gave significant performance gain to the whole system. First was the stupid question. Why do we need this additional service with special database? Can we just master the BizTalk to do something like this Resync() does? So the Resync orchestration is doing the same thing as the Resync service. It is started by the Id.A and finished by the id.A+id.B message. The first works as a Start message, the second works as a Finish message.     Here is a diagram the whole process without errors. It is pretty straightforward. The Resync orchestration is waiting for the Finish message specific period of time then resubmits the Id.A message. It resubmits the Id.A message specific number of times then gives up and gets suspended. It can be resubmitted then it starts the whole process again: waiting [, resubmitting [, get suspended]], finishing. Tuning up The Resync orchestration resubmits the id.A message with special “Resubmitted” flag. The subscription filter on the Resync orchestration includes predicate as (Resubmit_Flag != “Resubmitted”). That means only the first Sync orchestration starts the Resync orchestration. Other Sync orchestration instantiated by the resubmitting can finish this Resync orchestration but cannot start another instance of the Resync   Here is a diagram where system B was inaccessible for some period of time. The Resync orchestration resubmitted the id.A two times. Then system B got the response the id.A+id.B and this finished the Resync service execution. What is interesting about this, there were submitted several identical id.A messages and only one id.A+id.B message. Because of this, the system B and the Resync must tolerate the duplicate messages. We also told about this requirement for the system B. Now the same requirement is for the Resunc. Let’s assume the system B was very slow in the first response and the Resync service had time to resubmit two id.A messages. System B responded not, as it was in previous case, with one id.A+id.B but with two id.A+id.B messages. First of them finished the Resync execution for the id.A. What about the second id.A+id.B? Where it goes? So, we have to add one more internal requirement. The whole solution must tolerate many identical id.A+id.B messages. It is easy task with the BizTalk. I added the “SinkExtraMessages” subscriber (orchestration with one receive shape), that just get these messages and do nothing. Real design Real architecture is much more complex and interesting. In reality each system can submit several id.A almost simultaneously and completely unordered. There are not only the “Create entity” operation but the Update and Delete operations. And these operations relate each other. Say the Update operation after Delete means not the same as Update after Create. In reality there are entities related each other. Say the Order and Order Items. Change on one of it could start the series of the operations on another. Moreover, the system internals are the “black boxes” and we cannot predict the exact content and order of the operation series. It worth to say, I had to spend a time to manage the zombie message problems. The zombies are still here, but this is not a problem now. And this is another story. What is interesting in the last design? One orchestration works to help another to be more reliable. Why two orchestration design is more reliable, isn’t it something strange? The Synch orchestration takes all the message exchange between systems, here is the area where most of the errors could happen. The Resync orchestration sends and receives messages only within the BizTalk server. Is there another design? Sure. All Resync functionality could be implemented inside the Sync orchestration. Hey guys, some other ideas?

    Read the article

  • RESTful API Documentation

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

    Read the article

  • How to use the unit of work and repository patterns in a service oriented enviroment

    - by A. Karimi
    I've created an application framework using the unit of work and repository patterns for it's data layer. Data consumer layers such as presentation depend on the data layer design. For example a CRUD abstract form has a dependency to a repository (IRepository). This architecture works like a charm in client/server environments (Ex. a WPF application and a SQL Server). But I'm looking for a good pattern to change or reuse this architecture for a service oriented environment. Of course I have some ideas: Idea 1: The "Adapter" design pattern Keep the current architecture and create a new unit of work and repository implementation which can work with a service instead of the ORM. Data layer consumers are loosely coupled to the data layer so it's possible but the problem is about the unit of work; I have to create a context which tracks the objects state at the client side and sends the changes to the server side on calling the "Commit" (Something that I think the RIA has done for Silverlight). Here the diagram: ----------- CLIENT----------- | ------------------ SERVER ---------------------- [ UI ] -> [ UoW/Repository ] ---> [ Web Services ] -> [ UoW/Repository ] -> [DB] Idea 2: Add another layer Add another layer (let say "local services" or "data provider"), then put it between the data layer (unit of work and repository) and the data consumer layers (like UI). Then I have to rewrite the consumer classes (CRUD and other classes which are dependent to IRepository) to depend on another interface. And the diagram: ----------------- CLIENT ------------------ | ------------------- SERVER --------------------- [ UI ] -> [ Local Services/Data Provider ] ---> [ Web Services ] -> [ UoW/Repository ] -> [DB] Please note that I have the local services layer on the current architecture but it doesn't expose the data layer functionality. In another word the UI layer can communicate with both of the data and local services layers whereas the local services layer also uses the data layer. | | | | | | | | ---> | Local Services | ---> | | | UI | | | | Data | | | | | | | ----------------------------> | |

    Read the article

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