Search Results

Search found 15882 results on 636 pages for 'similar'.

Page 22/636 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

• Approaches for Content-based Item Recommendations

  - by PartlyCloudy

  Hello, I'm currently developing an application where I want to group similar items. Items (like videos) can be created by users and also their attributes can be altered or extended later (like new tags). Instead of relying on users' preferences as most collaborative filtering mechanisms do, I want to compare item similarity based on the items' attributes (like similar length, similar colors, similar set of tags, etc.). The computation is necessary for two main purposes: Suggesting x similar items for a given item and for clustering into groups of similar items. My application so far is follows an asynchronous design and I want to decouple this clustering component as far as possible. The creation of new items or the addition of new attributes for an existing item will be advertised by publishing events the component can then consume. Computations can be provided best-effort and "snapshotted", which means that I'm okay with the best result possible at a given point in time, although result quality will eventually increase. So I am now searching for appropriate algorithms to compute both similar items and clusters. At important constraint is scalability. Initially the application has to handle a few thousand items, but later million items might be possible as well. Of course, computations will then be executed on additional nodes, but the algorithm itself should scale. It would also be nice if the algorithm supports some kind of incremental mode on partial changes of the data. My initial thought of comparing each item with each other and storing the numerical similarity sounds a little bit crude. Also, it requires n*(n-1)/2 entries for storing all similarities and any change or new item will eventually cause n similarity computations. Thanks in advance! UPDATE tl;dr To clarify what I want, here is my targeted scenario: User generate entries (think of documents) User edit entry meta data (think of tags) And here is what my system should provide: List of similar entries to a given item as recommendation Clusters of similar entries Both calculations should be based on: The meta data/attributes of entries (i.e. usage of similar tags) Thus, the distance of two entries using appropriate metrics NOT based on user votings, preferences or actions (unlike collaborative filtering). Although users may create entries and change attributes, the computation should only take into account the items and their attributes, and not the users associated with (just like a system where only items and no users exist). Ideally, the algorithm should support: permanent changes of attributes of an entry incrementally compute similar entries/clusters on changes scale something better than a simple distance table, if possible (because of the O(n²) space complexity)

  Read the article

• Help! Getting an error copying the data from one column to the same column in a similar recordset..

  - by Mike D

  I have a routine which reads one recordset, and adds/updates rows in a similar recordset. The routine starts off by copying the columns to a new recordset: Here's the code for creating the new recordset.. For X = 1 To aRS.Fields.Count mRS.Fields.Append aRS.Fields(X - 1).Name, aRS.Fields(X - 1).Type, aRS.Fields(X - _ 1).DefinedSize, aRS.Fields(X - 1).Attributes Next X Pretty straight forward. Notice the copying of the name, Type, DefinedSize & Attributes... Further down in the code, (and there's nothing that modifies any of the columns between.. ) I'm copying the values of a row to a row in the new recordset as such: For C = 1 To aRS.Fields.Count mRS.Fields(C - 1) = aRS.Fields(C - 1) Next C When it gets to the last column which is a numeric, it craps with the "Mutliple-Step Operation Generated an error" message. I know that MS says this is an error generated by the provider, which in this case is ADO 2.8. There is no open connect to the DB at this point in time either. I'm pulling what little hair I have left over this one... (and I don't really care at this point that the column index is 'X' in one loop & 'C' in the other... I'll change it later when I get the real problem fixed...)

  Read the article

• Does Microsoft offer a corporate IM/collaboration tool similar to Campfire? My googlefu skills appear to be failing me today.

  - by user54266

  I mentioned to my boss that we should look into a single unified IM client that we could use and secure on a corporate level, and then suggested Campfire. We're a primarily Microsoft house so he suggested we use something that would better integrate with SharePoint and the other tools our end users use in house. However, I'm not aware of any Microsoft tool that does something like this. Obviously there is MSN Messenger but I think/hope he wasn't referring to that. Other than a product from 2005 I haven't been able to locate a Microsoft corporate IM tool...does anybody know what he may have been talking about?

  Read the article

• Is there a 'design pattern' type listing of common algorithms?

  - by KevinM1

  Is there a 'design pattern' styled listing of common/popular algorithms anywhere? Specifically, something that has a similar format along the lines of: Algorithm Name: e.g., Quick Sort, Bubble Sort, etc. Problem: A description of the stereotypical problem the algorithm is supposed to address Description: Description of the solution Implementation: Code examples of the solution Big O Rating: Self-explanatory Similar Algorithms: Algorithms that address the same problem in different ways, or similar problems I really like the GoF design pattern listing style, and I think it would help me learn various algorithms better/easier if I could find a resource that was similar in terms of organization.

  Read the article

• Fresh UI

  A handy tool similar to Tweak UI for configuring and optimizing Windows

  Read the article

• Algorithm for disordered sequences of strings

  - by Kinopiko

  The Levenshtein distance gives us a way to calculate the distance between two similar strings in terms of disordered individual characters: quick brown fox quikc brown fax The Levenshtein distance = 3. What is a similar algorithm for the distance between two strings with similar subsequences? For example, in quickbrownfox brownquickfox the Levenshtein distance is 10, but this takes no account of the fact that the strings have two similar subsequences, which makes them more "similar" than completely disordered words like quickbrownfox qburiocwknfox and yet the completely disordered version has a Levenshtein distance of eight. What distance measures exist which take the length of subsequences into account, without assuming that the subsequences can be easily broken into distinct words?

  Read the article

• Algorithm for measuring distance between disordered sequences

  - by Kinopiko

  The Levenshtein distance gives us a way to calculate the distance between two similar strings in terms of disordered individual characters: quick brown fox quikc brown fax The Levenshtein distance = 3. What is a similar algorithm for the distance between two strings with similar subsequences? For example, in quickbrownfox brownquickfox the Levenshtein distance is 10, but this takes no account of the fact that the strings have two similar subsequences, which makes them more "similar" than completely disordered words like quickbrownfox qburiocwknfox and yet this completely disordered version has a Levenshtein distance of eight. What distance measures exist which take the length of subsequences into account, without assuming that the subsequences can be easily broken into distinct words?

  Read the article

• Algorithm for measuring distance between disordered sequences of strings

  - by Kinopiko

  The Levenshtein distance gives us a way to calculate the distance between two similar strings in terms of disordered individual characters: quick brown fox quikc brown fax The Levenshtein distance = 3. What is a similar algorithm for the distance between two strings with similar subsequences? For example, in quickbrownfox brownquickfox the Levenshtein distance is 10, but this takes no account of the fact that the strings have two similar subsequences, which makes them more "similar" than completely disordered words like quickbrownfox qburiocwknfox and yet this completely disordered version has a Levenshtein distance of eight. What distance measures exist which take the length of subsequences into account, without assuming that the subsequences can be easily broken into distinct words?

  Read the article

• Configuring Fed Authentication Methods in OIF / IdP

  - by Damien Carru

  In this article, I will provide examples on how to configure OIF/IdP to map OAM Authentication Schemes to Federation Authentication Methods, based on the concepts introduced in my previous entry. I will show examples for the three protocols supported by OIF: SAML 2.0 SSO SAML 1.1 SSO OpenID 2.0 Enjoy the reading! Configuration As I mentioned in my previous article, mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes is protocol dependent, since the methods are defined in the various protocols (SAML 2.0, SAML 1.1, OpenID 2.0). As such, the WLST commands to set those mappings will involve: Either the SP Partner Profile and affect all Partners referencing that profile, which do not override the Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings Or the SP Partner entry, which will only affect the SP Partner It is important to note that if an SP Partner is configured to define one or more Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings, then all the mappings defined in the SP Partner Profile will be ignored. WLST Commands The two OIF WLST commands that can be used to define mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes are: addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner Profile, taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner Profile The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner , taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name Note: I will discuss in a subsequent article the other parameters of those commands. In the next sections, I will show examples on how to use those methods: For SAML 2.0, I will configure the SP Partner Profile, that will apply all the mappings to SP Partners referencing this profile, unless they override mapping definition For SAML 1.1, I will configure the SP Partner. For OpenID 2.0, I will configure the SP/RP Partner SAML 2.0 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 2.0 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use BasicScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map BasicSessionScheme  to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password Federation Authentication Method Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> BasicScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to BasicScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via HTTP Basic Authentication defined in the BasicScheme for AcmeSP. Also, as noted earlier, the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping BasicScheme To change the Federation Authentication Method mapping for the BasicScheme to urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password instead of urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport for the saml20-sp-partner-profile SAML 2.0 SP Partner Profile (the profile to which my AcmeSP Partner is bound to), I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the AuthnContextClassRef was changed from PasswordProtectedTransport to Password): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of BasicScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme and BasicScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods. As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthnContextClassRef set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To add the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport mapping, I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to PasswordProtectedTransport): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> SAML 1.1 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 1.1 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods (in the SP Partner Profile). As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To map the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password for this SP Partner only, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to password): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme I will now show that by defining a Federation Authentication Mapping at the Partner level, this now ignores all mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile level. For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for this SP Partner back to LDAPScheme, and the Assertion issued by OIF/IdP will not be able to map this LDAPScheme to a Federation Authentication Method anymore, since A Federation Authentication Method mapping is defined at the SP Partner level and thus the mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile are ignored The LDAPScheme is not listed in the mapping at the Partner level I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for this SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to LDAPScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="LDAPScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping LDAPScheme at Partner Level To fix this issue, we will need to add the LDAPScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password mapping for this SP Partner only. I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to password): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OpenID 2.0 In the OpenID 2.0 flows, the RP must request use of PAPE, in order for OIF/IdP/OP to include PAPE information. For OpenID 2.0, the configuration will involve mapping a list of OpenID 2.0 policies to a list of Authentication Schemes. The WLST command will take a list of policies, delimited by the ',' character, instead of SAML 2.0 or SAML 1.1 where a single Federation Authentication Method had to be specified. Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP/OP and is integrated with a remote OpenID 2.0 SP/RP partner identified by AcmeRP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods (the second one is a custom for this use case) LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. No Federation Authentication Method is defined OOTB for OpenID 2.0, so if the IdP/OP issue an SSO response with a PAPE Response element, it will specify the scheme name instead of Federation Authentication Methods After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an SSO Response similar to: https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=LDAPScheme&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D Mapping LDAPScheme To map the LDAP Scheme to the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method (the policies will be comma separated): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeRP", "http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant,http://openid-policies/password-protected", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to the two policies): https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fpape%2Fpolicies%2F2007%2F06%2Fphishing-resistant+http%3A%2F%2Fopenid-policies%2Fpassword-protected&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D In the next article, I will cover how OIF/IdP can be configured so that an SP can request a specific Federation Authentication Method to challenge the user during Federation SSO.Cheers,Damien Carru

  Read the article

• Organization &amp; Architecture UNISA Studies &ndash; Chap 6

  - by MarkPearl

  Learning Outcomes Discuss the physical characteristics of magnetic disks Describe how data is organized and accessed on a magnetic disk Discuss the parameters that play a role in the performance of magnetic disks Describe different optical memory devices Magnetic Disk The way data is stored on and retried from magnetic disks Data is recorded on and later retrieved form the disk via a conducting coil named the head (in many systems there are two heads) The writ mechanism exploits the fact that electricity flowing through a coil produces a magnetic field. Electric pulses are sent to the write head, and the resulting magnetic patterns are recorded on the surface below with different patterns for positive and negative currents The physical characteristics of a magnetic disk   Summarize from book   The factors that play a role in the performance of a disk Seek time – the time it takes to position the head at the track Rotational delay / latency – the time it takes for the beginning of the sector to reach the head Access time – the sum of the seek time and rotational delay Transfer time – the time it takes to transfer data RAID The rate of improvement in secondary storage performance has been considerably less than the rate for processors and main memory. Thus secondary storage has become a bit of a bottleneck. RAID works on the concept that if one disk can be pushed so far, additional gains in performance are to be had by using multiple parallel components. Points to note about RAID… RAID is a set of physical disk drives viewed by the operating system as a single logical drive Data is distributed across the physical drives of an array in a scheme known as striping Redundant disk capacity is used to store parity information, which guarantees data recoverability in case of a disk failure (not supported by RAID 0 or RAID 1) Interesting to note that the increase in the number of drives, increases the probability of failure. To compensate for this decreased reliability RAID makes use of stored parity information that enables the recovery of data lost due to a disk failure.   The RAID scheme consists of 7 levels…   Category Level Description Disks Required Data Availability Large I/O Data Transfer Capacity Small I/O Request Rate Striping 0 Non Redundant N Lower than single disk Very high Very high for both read and write Mirroring 1 Mirrored 2N Higher than RAID 2 – 5 but lower than RAID 6 Higher than single disk Up to twice that of a signle disk for read Parallel Access 2 Redundant via Hamming Code N + m Much higher than single disk Highest of all listed alternatives Approximately twice that of a single disk Parallel Access 3 Bit interleaved parity N + 1 Much higher than single disk Highest of all listed alternatives Approximately twice that of a single disk Independent Access 4 Block interleaved parity N + 1 Much higher than single disk Similar to RAID 0 for read, significantly lower than single disk for write Similar to RAID 0 for read, significantly lower than single disk for write Independent Access 5 Block interleaved parity N + 1 Much higher than single disk Similar to RAID 0 for read, lower than single disk for write Similar to RAID 0 for read, generally  lower than single disk for write Independent Access 6 Block interleaved parity N + 2 Highest of all listed alternatives Similar to RAID 0 for read; lower than RAID 5 for write Similar to RAID 0 for read, significantly lower than RAID 5  for write   Read page 215 – 221 for detailed explanation on RAID levels Optical Memory There are a variety of optical-disk systems available. Read through the table on page 222 – 223 Some of the devices include… CD CD-ROM CD-R CD-RW DVD DVD-R DVD-RW Blue-Ray DVD Magnetic Tape Most modern systems use serial recording – data is lade out as a sequence of bits along each track. The typical recording used in serial is referred to as serpentine recording. In this technique when data is being recorded, the first set of bits is recorded along the whole length of the tape. When the end of the tape is reached the heads are repostioned to record a new track, and the tape is again recorded on its whole length, this time in the opposite direction. That process continued back and forth until the tape is full. To increase speed, the read-write head is capable of reading and writing a number of adjacent tracks simultaneously. Data is still recorded serially along individual tracks, but blocks in sequence are stored on adjacent tracks as suggested. A tape drive is a sequential access device. Magnetic tape was the first kind of secondary memory. It is still widely used as the lowest-cost, slowest speed member of the memory hierarchy.

  Read the article

• Software Center seems to freeze system when installing, syslog has "blocked for more than 120 seconds" errors

  - by nbm

  12.04 (precise) 64-bit Kernel Linux 3.2.0-39 3.6GB memory Intel Core 2 Duo CPU @ 2.40GHz x2 WUBI-installed Ubuntu running on a MacBook Pro 7.1 with OSX running Vista via Boot Camp (hey, I like lots of OS's m'kay?) When installing from Ubuntu software center my system very frequently freezes. This has happened 4 of the last 5 installs. Most recently I was installing the Google Earth .deb from Google's website: clicking the .deb file automatically opens Software Center (otherwise I would have used Synaptic, as I've grown to expect Software Center to freeze my system and I'm rather tired of it.) By "freeze" I mean nothing works: no dash, no launcher, no mouse movement, no alt-tab, can't open terminal (keyboard does not work). Software center does show the "installing" icon but after that it greys out and I can't click anything. REISUB has no effect but a cold power-down and restart is possible. Occasionally, after 5-10 minutes, I'll be able to move the mouse / use the keyboard and run a launcher command or two, although other open apps (Chrome and Software Center) will still be greyed-out/frozen. (I've never waited longer than that - if still unresponsive after 15 minutes I just power down and restart.) Most recently, which is why I am finally posting a question, I waited about 15 minutes and was finally able to open System Monitor while this was going on. Processes tells me that System Monitor is using about 20% of CPU, and nothing else is using much (zeros mostly). In fact I didn't even see Software Center listed? However at this point the system finally partially unfroze, the installation completed, and while I wasn't about to close Software Center I was able to do a system shutdown and fresh restart and I went and took a look at the syslog. In /var/log/syslog I see a lot of ":blocked for more than 120 seconds" messages. Similar to ubuntu hang out with this message :blocked for more than 120 seconds Which has not been answered, and I'm not running a virtual machine. My full syslog with stack traces looks very, very similar to this: Why do tasks on Amazon Xen instance block for over 120 seconds causing server to hang? Note that that question was solved, but that's because the problem was being caused by Amazon and Amazon fixed the bug. I'm not running anything Amazon-related. My syslog does look very similar, however. My question is also similar to this: Troubleshooting server hang But the referenced "duplicate" in that question is about how to kill processes/restart when the system freezes. I know how to kill processes and restart. I want to figure out what is causing the problem so I can try to fix it. I realize that I could just use Synaptic instead of Ubuntu Software Center, but I'd like to try to solve the problem if possible. I'm thinking I should perhaps submit a bug report, but I wanted to first see if anyone else was having any similar problems, and if so what you all did to fix it. I see a number of questions about Software Center freezing and others, including those I linked, about the "blocked for more than 120 seconds" log error, but I didn't see any question that links the two. I did save a copy of the syslog report if anyone wants to see it, but as mentioned it's quite similar to the one posted in the Amazon-related question...and I didn't want to take up even more space unnecessarily as, my apologies - this question has already become extremely verbose!

  Read the article

• Algorithm to find the percentage of how much two texts are identical

  - by qster

  What algorithm would you suggest to identify how much from 0 to 1 (float) two texts are identical? Note that I don't mean similar (ie, they say the same thing but in a different way), I mean exact same words, but one of the two texts could have extra words or words slightly different or extra new lines and stuff like that. A good example of the algorithm I want is the one google uses to identify duplicate content in websites (X search results very similar to the ones shown have been omitted, click here to see them). The reason I need it is because my website has the ability for users to post comments; similar but different pages currently have their own comments, so many users ended up copy&pasting their comments on all the similar pages. Now I want to merge them (all similar pages will "share" the comments, and if you post it on page A it will appear on similar page B), and I would like to programatically erase all those copy&pasted comments from the same user. I have quite a few million comments but speed shouldn't be an issue since this is a one time thing that will run in the background. The programming language doesn't really matter (as long as it can interface to a MySQL database), but I was thinking of doing it in C++.

  Read the article

• Clustering Strings on the basis of Common Substrings

  - by pk188

  I have around 10000+ strings and have to identify and group all the strings which looks similar(I base the similarity on the number of common words between any two give strings). The more number of common words, more similar the strings would be. For instance: How to make another layer from an existing layer Unable to edit data on the network drive Existing layers in the desktop Assistance with network drive In this case, the strings 1 and 3 are similar with common words Existing, Layer and 2 and 4 are similar with common words Network Drive(eliminating stop word) The steps I'm following are: Iterate through the data set Do a row by row comparison Find the common words between the strings Form a cluster where number of common words is greater than or equal to 2(eliminating stop words) If number of common words<2, put the string in a new cluster. Assign the rows either to the existing clusters or form a new one depending upon the common words Continue until all the strings are processed I am implementing the project in C#, and have got till step 3. However, I'm not sure how to proceed with the clustering. I have researched a lot about string clustering but could not find any solution that fits my problem. Your inputs would be highly appreciated.

  Read the article

• How to shrink Windows partition with unmovable files in dual boot installation

  - by Tim

  To install Ubuntu alongside Windows 7, I have to shrink Windows 7 partition C:. But due to some unmovable files, I cannot shrink as much as I plan by using Windows own shrinking tool. I guess many of you who have both OSes on the same hard drive must have similar experience. How to solve this problem? Any reference that can help is also appreciated! Thanks and regards! UPDATE: I have identified what unmovable file currently stop further shrinking: \ProgramData\Microsoft\Search\Data\Applications\Windows\Projects\SystemIndex\Indexer\CiFiles\00010015.wid::$DATA If I understand correctly, the file belongs to Windows Search. Can I set up somewhere in Windows system settings to temperately eliminate the file and similar ones (because there are many similar files under the same directory which I guess will also stand in the way of shrinking and unmovable by defrag)?

  Read the article

• Do they ask too much on this job?

  - by user58404

  I am looking for web developer job and this job description caught my eyes. I am not sure how much they offer but I was wondering if anyone here meets all of their requirements? To me, that's a lot of knowledge. 2 to 4+ years experience building web sites and applications in a professional environment Strong working knowledge of HTML5 and CSS3 Strong working knowledge of JavaScript, jQuery, AJAX Working knowledge of Ruby on Rails or similar MVC framework Working knowledge of ExpressionEngine, Wordpress or similar CMS Experience administering a LAMP-based server Experience with cross-platform and cross-browser website testing Comfortable working with version control (preferably Git) Proficient with Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, and Fireworks Comfortable working on a Mac Self-starter with excellent time-management skills with the ability to meet challenging deadlines Ability to work independently with minimal supervision Desire to work on a small team Bonus Skills: Experience deploying to Heroku or similar PaaS provider. Experience developing Facebook applications A strong sense of design Cool open source projects (send us your Github account!) Advanced working knowledge of server administration and website deployment. Java and/or .NET experience

  Read the article

• July, the 31 Days of SQL Server DMO’s – Day 19 (sys.dm_exec_query_stats)

  - by Tamarick Hill

  The sys.dm_exec_query_stats DMV is one of the most useful DMV’s out there when it comes to performance tuning. If you have been keeping up with this blog series this month, you know that I started out on Day 1 reviewing many of the DMV’s within the ‘exec’ namespace. I’m not sure how I missed this one considering how valuable it is, but hey, they say it’s better late than never right?? On Day 7 and Day 8 we reviewed the sys.dm_exec_procedure_stats and sys.dm_exec_trigger_stats respectively. This sys.dm_exec_query_stats DMV is very similar to these two. As a matter of fact, this DMV will return all of the information you saw in the other two DMV’s, but in addition to that, you can see stats for all queries that have cached execution plans on your server. You can even see stats for statements that are ran Ad-Hoc as long as they are still cached in the buffer pool. To better illustrate this DMV, let have a quick look at it: SELECT * FROM sys.dm_exec_query_stats As you can see, there is a lot of information returned from this DMV. I wont go into detail about each and every one of these columns, but I will touch on a few of them briefly. The first column is the ‘sql_handle’, which if you remember from Day 4 of our blog series, I explained how you can use this column to extract the actual SQL text that was executed. The next columns statement_start_offset and statement_end_offset provide you a way of extracting the exact SQL statement that was executed as part of a batch. The plan_handle column is used to extract the Execution plan that was used, which we talked about during Day 5 of this blog series. Later in the result set, you have columns to identify how many times a particular statement was executed, how much CPU time it used, how many reads/writes it performed, the duration, how many rows were returned, etc. These columns provide you with a solid avenue to begin your performance optimization. The last column I will touch on is the query_plan_hash column. A lot of times when you have Dynamic SQL running on your server, you have similar statements with different parameter values being passed in. Many times these types of statements will get similar execution plans and then a Binary hash value can be generated based on these similar plans. This query plan hash can be used to find the cost of all queries that have similar execution plans and then you can tune based on that plan to improve the performance of all of the individual queries. This is a very powerful way of identifying and tuning Ad-hoc statements that run on your server. As I stated earlier, this sys.dm_exec_query_stats DMV is a very powerful and recommended DMV for performance tuning. You are able to quickly identify statements that are running on your server and analyze their impact on system resources. Using this DMV to track down the biggest performance killers on your server will allow you to make the biggest gains once you focus your tuning efforts on those top offenders. For more information about this DMV, please see the below Books Online link: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189741.aspx Follow me on Twitter @PrimeTimeDBA

  Read the article

• What's the difference between lib/ and plugins/ in symfony?

  - by symfony

  Library and Plugins seem similar,what's the difference?

  Read the article

• Are there logging frameworks or well-known design patterns for Ada in addition to Alog (http://www.n

  - by anachoret

  Such as something similar to log4j?

  Read the article

• Speech recognition webservice that scores the accuracy of one audio clips vs. another?

  - by wgpubs

  Does such a thing exist? Building a Rails based web application where users can upload an audio file of them speaking that then needs to be compared to another audio file for the purposes of determining how similar to voices are. Ideally I'd like to simply get a response that gives me a score of how similar they are in terms of percentage (e.g. 75% similar etc...). Anyone have any ideas? Thanks

  Read the article

• System.IO.Path or equivelent use with Unix paths

  - by pm_2

  Is it possible to either use the System.IO.Path class, or some similar object to format a unix style path, providing similar functionality to the PATH class? For example, I can do: Console.WriteLine(Path.Combine("c:\\", "windows")); Which shows: "C:\\windows" But is I try a similar thing with forward slashes (/) it just reverses them for me. Console.WriteLine(Path.Combine("/server", "mydir")); Which shows: "/server\\mydir"

  Read the article

• Mysql SELECT with an OR across 2 columns

  - by Haroldo

  I'm creating a 'similar items' link table. i have a 2 column table. both columns contains product ids. The table is showing that these items are similar. However ids in the left column are more valuable. Say i want to select similar items to product '125b'. i only want 3 similar items to 125b. If there are any instances of 125b in col1 I would prefer these to finding 125b in col2. so i need a select statement along the lines of SELECT * FROM similar_items WHERE col_1={$id} OR col_2={$id} ORDER BY column(?) LIMIT 3 i do not want to do 2 separate queries ( ie query 2 if count(query1) <3 )

  Read the article

• ZTE USB Modem AC2736, connection not possible in Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS

  - by Fredo

  It's a long post but nearly covers all my experiments and changes I did to my NM. Hope the information is complete and if there are still question, more information can be provided. I've a ZTE AC2736 USB Modem (CDMA modem) which worked fine in Ubuntu 10.04 /11.10. I recently switched to 12.04.1 (precise pangolin). after the switch the first issue I faced was to connect to internet using my USB modem (ISP: Reliance Brand: Netconnect). Tried to run the drivers provided by Reliance but they are old and won't support Kernel 2.6.30 above. since the code was not downloaded with ISO image (of 12.04) i couldn't compile the files provided in such driver. lsusb does detect it as Modem with output similar to 19d2:fff1 ZTE CDMA technologies inc. (or similar as i didn't note it down) If it is detected as USB storage it shows 19d2:fff5 (as per few online forums, i may be wrong here). I used the network Manager and configured the modem to dial #777 (default) and the ISP provided username:password combination. It tries to connect to internet (3-4 times automatically)but fails to get online. once I was able to connect in the monring hours and the message was flashed 'registered on CDMA home network'. I was able to run an update. the kernel was updated with 3.0.2 -pae OR something similar (can find out if required). I surfed the net for about 2 hours later before restarting. After the restart, again the Modem was not able to get me online. I kept trying for many times. I tried changing the setting in NM. One evening after dark I was able to connect to network with same message flash 'registered on CDMA home network' (the message was similar, i'm not precise here,sorry). I was able to surf the net for nearly 3 hours before I switched off my Laptop. I'm not able to get online after that day, It's been 3 days now. I'll try the observered theory of late/early hours sometime soon as mentioned below. Laptop configuration : Make: Lenovo Model: B480 Processor: Intel B950 RAM: 4G DDR3 HDD: 500 G Broadcom Wireless/Bluetooth/Ethernet LAN OS: FreeDOS / Ubuntu 12.04 LTS (dualboot) Kernel 3.0.2-pae Obeservation : I'm able to connect to internet in those hours when generally the speed is high (low usage by other network (wireless) users). like in early mornings or late nights. This is strange as connection should not be dependent on bandwidth usage. Any help would be appraciated to fix this issue. before I decide to cahnge the OS or ISP.

  Read the article

• Monitoring Domain Availability

  - by JP19

  How can I write a tool to monitor domain name availability? In particular, I am interested in monitoring availability of a domain which is in PENDINGDELETE (or REDEMPTIONPERIOD or REGISTRY-DELETE-NOTIFY or PENDINGRESTORE or similar ) status after its expiration date. Any suggestions or more information about the PENDINGDELETE and similar status are also welcome (what is the time frame till which it can remain in this status, etc. I usually don't see a fixed pattern or even consistent correlation with expiration date and this status).

  Read the article

• A star algorithm implementation problems

  - by bryan226

  I’m having some trouble implementing the A* algorithm in a 2D tile based game. The problem is basically that the algorithm gets stuck when something gets in its direct way (e.g. walls) Note that it only allows Horizontal and Vertical movement. Here's a picture as it works fine across the map without something in its direct way: (Green tile = destination, Blue = In closed list, Green = in open list) This is what happens if I try to walk 'around' a wall: I calculate costs with the F = G + H formula: G = 1 Cost per Step H = 10 Cost per Step //Count how many tiles are between current-tile & destination-tile The functions: short c_astar::GuessH(short Startx,short Starty,short Destinationx,short Destinationy) { hgeVector Start, Destination; Start.x = Startx; Start.y = Starty; Destination.x = Destinationx; Destination.y = Destinationy; short a = 0; short b = 0; if(Start.x > Destination.x) a = Start.x - Destination.x; else a = Destination.x - Start.x; if(Start.y > Destination.y) b = Start.y - Destination.y; else b = Destination.y - Start.y; return (a+b)*10; } short c_astar::GuessG(short Startx,short Starty,short Currentx,short Currenty) { hgeVector Start, Destination; Start.x = Startx; Start.y = Starty; Destination.x = Currentx; Destination.y = Currenty; short a = 0; short b = 0; if(Start.x > Destination.x) a = Start.x - Destination.x; else a = Destination.x - Start.x; if(Start.y > Destination.y) b = Start.y - Destination.y; else b = Destination.y - Start.y; return (a+b); } At the end of the loop I check which tile is the cheapest to go according to its F value: Then some quick checks are done for each tile (UP,DOWN,LEFT,RIGHT): //...CX are holding the F value of the TILE specified // Info: C0 = Center (Current) // C1 = UP // C2 = DOWN // C3 = LEFT // C4 = RIGHT //Quick checks if(((C1 < C2) && (C1 < C3) && (C1 < C4))) { Current.y -= 1; bSimilar = false; if(DEBUG) hge->System_Log("C1 < ALL"); } //.. same for C2,C3 & C4 If there are multiple tiles with the same F value: It’s actually a switch for DOWNLEFT,UPRIGHT.. etc. Here’s one of it: case UPRIGHT: { //UP Temporary = Current; Temporary.y -= 1; bTileStatus[0] = IsTileWalkable(Temporary.x,Temporary.y); if(bTileStatus[0]) { //Proceed normal we are OK & walkable Tilex.Tile = map.at(Temporary.y).at(Temporary.x); //Search in lists if(SearchInClosedList(Tilex.Tile.ID,C0)) bFoundInClosedList[0] = true; if(SearchInOpenList(Tilex.Tile.ID,C0)) bFoundInOpenList[0] = true; //RIGHT Temporary = Current; Temporary.x += 1; bTileStatus[1] = IsTileWalkable(Temporary.x,Temporary.y); if(bTileStatus[1]) { //Proceed normal we are OK & walkable Tilex.Tile = map.at(Temporary.y).at(Temporary.x); //Search in lists if(SearchInClosedList(Tilex.Tile.ID,C0)) bFoundInClosedList[1] = true; if(SearchInOpenList(Tilex.Tile.ID,C0)) bFoundInOpenList[1] = true; //************************************************* // Purpose: ClosedList behavior //************************************************* if(bFoundInClosedList[0] && !bFoundInClosedList[1]) { //UP found in ClosedList. Go RIGHT return RIGHT; } if(!bFoundInClosedList[0] && bFoundInClosedList[1]) { //RIGHT found in ClosedList. Go UP return UP; } if(bFoundInClosedList[0] && bFoundInClosedList[1]) { //Both found in ClosedList. Random value switch(hge->Random_Int(8,9)) { case 8: return UP; break; case 9: return RIGHT; break; } } //************************************************* // Purpose: OpenList behavior //************************************************* if(bFoundInOpenList[0] && !bFoundInOpenList[1]) { //UP found in OpenList. Go RIGHT return RIGHT; } if(!bFoundInOpenList[0] && bFoundInOpenList[1]) { //RIGHT found in OpenList. Go UP return UP; } if(bFoundInOpenList[0] && bFoundInOpenList[1]) { //Both found in OpenList. Random value switch(hge->Random_Int(8,9)) { case 8: return UP; break; case 9: return RIGHT; break; } } } else if(!bTileStatus[1]) { //RIGHT is not walkable OR out of range //Choose UP return UP; } } else if(!bTileStatus[0]) { //UP is not walkable OR out of range //Fast check RIGHT Temporary = Current; Temporary.x += 1; bTileStatus[1] = IsTileWalkable(Temporary.x,Temporary.y); if(bTileStatus[1]) { return RIGHT; } else return FAILED; //Failed, no valid path found! } } break; A log for the second picture: (Cut down to ten passes, because it’s just repeating itself) ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 1 | C1: 211 | C2: 191 | C3: 211 | C4: 191 DOWN + RIGHT SIMILAR Going DOWN ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 2 | C1: 200 | C2: 182 | C3: 202 | C4: 182 DOWN + RIGHT SIMILAR Going DOWN ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 3 | C1: 191 | C2: 193 | C3: 193 | C4: 173 C4 < ALL Tile(12.000000,6.000000) not walkable. MAX_F_VALUE set. ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 4 | C1: 182 | C2: 184 | C3: 182 | C4: 999 UP + LEFT SIMILAR Going UP Tile(12.000000,5.000000) not walkable. MAX_F_VALUE set. ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 5 | C1: 191 | C2: 173 | C3: 191 | C4: 999 C2 < ALL Tile(12.000000,6.000000) not walkable. MAX_F_VALUE set. ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 6 | C1: 182 | C2: 184 | C3: 182 | C4: 999 UP + LEFT SIMILAR Going UP Tile(12.000000,5.000000) not walkable. MAX_F_VALUE set. ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 7 | C1: 191 | C2: 173 | C3: 191 | C4: 999 C2 < ALL Tile(12.000000,6.000000) not walkable. MAX_F_VALUE set. ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 8 | C1: 182 | C2: 184 | C3: 182 | C4: 999 UP + LEFT SIMILAR Going LEFT ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 9 | C1: 191 | C2: 193 | C3: 193 | C4: 173 C4 < ALL Tile(12.000000,6.000000) not walkable. MAX_F_VALUE set. ----------------------------------------------------- PASS: 10 | C1: 182 | C2: 184 | C3: 182 | C4: 999 UP + LEFT SIMILAR Going LEFT ----------------------------------------------------- Its always going after the cheapest F value, which seems to be wrong. If someone could point me to the right direction I'd be thankful. Regards, bryan226

  Read the article

• Where can I find free or buy "next-gen" 3D Assets?

  - by Valmond

  Usually I buy 3D Assets from sites like turbosquid.com or similar. My problem is that I have lately implemented glow, normal maps, specular (and specular power) maps and reflection maps and I can't find any models that use those techniques. So where can I find / buy "next gen" assets (at least models/items with a normal map)? I have checked for similar posts but those I found are about either free only or 2D or 'ordinary' 3D so I hope this is not a duplicate.

  Read the article

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