Search Results

Search found 49554 results on 1983 pages for 'database users'.

Page 231/1983 | < Previous Page | 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238  | Next Page >

  • Wisdom of merging 100s of Oracle instances into one instance

    - by hoytster
    Our application runs on the web, is mostly an inquiry tool, does some transactions. We host the Oracle database. The app has always had a different instance of Oracle for each customer. A customer is a company which pays us to provide our service to the company's employees, typically 10,000-25,000 employees per customer. We do a major release every few years, and migrating to that new release is challenging: we might have a team at the customer site for a couple weeks, explaining new functionality and setting up the driving data to suit that customer. We're considering going multi-client, putting all our customers into a single shared Oracle 11g instance on a big honkin' Windows Server 2008 server -- in order to reduce costs. I'm wondering if that's advisable. There are some advantages to having separate instances for each customer. Tell me if these are bogus, please. In my rough guess about decreasing importance: Our customers MyCorp and YourCo can be migrated separately when breaking changes are made to the schema. (With multi-client, we'd be migrating 300+ customers overnight!?!) MyCorp's data can be easily backed up and (!!!) restored, without affecting other customers. MyCorp's data is securely separated from their competitor YourCo's data, without depending on developers to get the code right and/or DBAs getting the configuration right. Performance is better because the database is smaller (5,000 vs 2,000,000 rows in ~50 tables). If MyCorp's offices are (mostly) in just one region, then the MyCorp's instance can be geographically co-located there, so network lag doesn't hurt performance. We can provide better service to global clients, for the same reason. In MyCorp wants to take their database in-house, then we can easily export their instance, to get MyCorp their data. Load-balancing is easier because instances can be placed on different servers (this is with a web farm). When a DEV or QA instance is needed, it's easier to clone the real instance and anonymize the data, because there's much less data. Because they're small enough, developers can have their own instance running locally, so they can work on code while waiting at the airport and while in-flight, without fighting VPN hassles. Q1: What are other advantages of separate instances? We are contemplating changing the database schema and merging all of our customers into one Oracle instance, running on one hefty server. Here are advantages of the multi-client instance approach, most important first (my WAG). Please snipe if these are bogus: Less work for the DBAs, since they only need to maintain one instance instead of hundreds. Less DBA work translates to cheaper, our main motive for this change. With just one instance, the DBAs can do a better job of optimizing performance. They'll have time to add appropriate indexes and review our SQL. It will be easier for developers to debug & enhance the application, because there is only one schema and one app (there might be dozens of schema versions if there are hundreds of instances, with a different version of the app for each version of the schema). This reduces costs too. The alternative is having to start every debug session with (1) What version is this customer running and (2) Let's struggle to recreate the corresponding development environment, code and database. (We need a Virtual Machine that includes the code AND database instance for each patch and release!) Licensing Oracle is cheaper because it's priced per server irrespective of heft (or something -- I don't know anything about the subject). The database becomes a viable persistent store for web session data, because there is just one instance. Some database operations are easier with one multi-client instance, like finding a participant when they're hazy about which customer they (or their spouse, maybe) works for: all the names are in one table. Reporting across customers is straightforward. Q2: What are other advantages of having multiple clients in one instance? Q3: Which approach do you think is better (why)? Instance per customer, or all customers in one instance? I'm concerned that having one multi-client instance makes migration near-impossible, and that's a deal killer... ... unless there is a compromise solution like having two multi-client instances, the old and the new. In that case case, we would design cross-instance solutions for finding participants, reporting, etc. so customers could go from one multi-client instance to the next without anything breaking. THANKS SO MUCH for your collective advice! This issue is beyond me -- but not beyond the collective you. :) Hoytster

    Read the article

  • How to recreate missing Team Foundation Server database?

    - by Amadiere
    I've been trying out TFS 2010 Beta 2 on my local machine, or at least, had installed ready to do so. I had some issues with my MSSQL2008 server so I completely uninstalled and re-installed it and that sorted it. However, I'm now in limbo with TFS. I have the software installed, but it has none of the SQL databases installed that go with it. I had no data and am not precious about how to go about it. I figure completely uninstalling and re-installing might be an idea and will most likely fix it (repair didn't work). Is there a quicker way? Is there a command line utility that I can run, or a SQL script to recreate it all?

    Read the article

  • Database not completely updated in rails migration

    - by Aatish Sai
    I am new to Ruby on Rails. I have a migration called create user class CreateUsers < ActiveRecord::Migration def change create_table :users do |t| t.column :username, :string, :limit => 25, :default => "", :null => false t.column :hashed_password, :string, :limit => 40, :default => "", :null => false t.column :first_name, :string, :limit => 25, :default => "", :null => false t.column :last_name, :string, :limit => 40, :default => "", :null => false t.column :email, :string, :limit => 50, :default => "", :null => false t.column :display_name, :string, :limit => 25, :default => "", :null => false t.column :user_level, :integer, :limit => 3, :default => 0, :null => false end User.create(:username=>'test',:hashed_password=>'test',:first_name=>'test',:last_name=>'test',:email=>'[email protected]',:display_name=> 'test',:user_level=>9) end end When I run rake db:migrate the table is created with the columns as mentioned above but the test data are not there mysql>select * from users; Empty set (0.00 sec) EDIT I just dropped the whole database and restarted the migration and now it is showing the following error. rake aborted! An error has occurred, all later migrations canceled: Can't mass-assign protected attributes: username, hashed_password, first_name, last_name, email, display_name, user_level What am I doing wrong please help? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to restore PostgreSQL database from .tar file?

    - by Stephen
    I have all PostgreSQL databases backed up during incremental backups using WHM, which creates a $dbName.tar file. Data is stored in these .tar files, but I do not know how to restore it back into the individual databases via SSH. In particular the file location. I have been using: pg_restore -d client03 /backup/cpbackup/daily/client03/psql/client03.tar which generates the error 'could not open input file: Permission denied' Any assistance appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to ad users using A shiro Plugin

    - by Anirudh
    Hello, I am using Shiro plugin for my grails application security, My application already has a user .Using the shiro plugin, we get a shiro user, now how do i integrate the shiro user with the normal user of my application,show i go ahead and use relationships or is it that the user class ahould be only a shiro user class now ??

    Read the article

  • Using Custom HttpHandler to redirect users in Sharepoint

    - by BeraCim
    Hi all: I need to redirect a user to a different page if they visit a certain set of pages in a web. There is one condition: I'm not allowed to touch the IIS. I have googled around and found a thing called the custom HttpHandler for WSS 3.0. It sounded like something that I can use to capture the URL the user enters (the most malicious way to get to a page that should really be redirected) and redirect them to another page/web. But having not have the chance to use it yet, I was wondering am I on the right track by using a Custom HttpHandler to redirect a user to a different page in Sharepoint using C#? Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • database security with php page that spits out XML

    - by Rees
    Hello, I just created a PHP page that spits outs some data from my database in an XML format. This data is fetched from a flex application I made. I had spent a long time formatting my tables and database information and do not want anyone to be able to simply type www.mysite.com/page_that_spits_out_XML.php and steal my data. However, at the same time I need to be able to access this page from my flex application. Is there a way I can prevent other people from doing this? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Normalization in plain English

    - by Yada
    I sort of understand the concept of database normalization but always have a hard time explaining it in plain English especially for a job interview. I have read the wikipedia post, but still find it hard to explain the concept to none developers. "Design a database in a way not to get duplicated data" is the first thing that comes to mind. Does anyone was a nice way to explain the concept of database normalization in plain English. And what are some nice examples to show the differences between first, second and third normal forms. Say you go to a job interview and the person asks: Explain the concept of normalization and how would go about designing a normalized database. What key points are the interviewer looking for?

    Read the article

  • Storing date and time as epoch vs native datetime format in the database

    - by zakovyrya
    For most of my tasks I find it much easier to work with date and time in the epoch format: it's trivial to calculate timespan or determine if some event happened before or after another, I don't have to deal with time-zone issues if the data comes from different geographical sources, in case of scripting languages what I usually get from database when I request a datetime-typed column is a string that I need to parse in order to work with it. This list can go on, but for me in order to keep my code portable that's enough to ditch database's native datetime format and store date and time as integer. What do you guys think?

    Read the article

  • mySQL removes first digit

    - by kielie
    Hi guys, I am inputting data into a mySQL database via a PHP script, but for some reason when I check the database, all of the phone numbers have their first digit removed, like so, 0123456789 shows up as 123456789 in the database, but if I change the data type from INT to TEXT, it shows correctly, I am very hesitant to keep it as TEXT though, as I am sure this will cause complications further down the road as the database app starts to become more complicated, here is the PHP code. <?php $gender = $_POST['gender']; $first_name = $_POST['first_name']; $second_name = $_POST['second_name']; $id_number = $_POST['id_number']; $home_number = $_POST['home_number']; $cell_work = $_POST['cell_work']; $email_address = $_POST['email_address']; $curDate = date("Y-m-d"); mysql_connect ("server", "user", "pass") or die ('Error: ' . mysql_error()); mysql_select_db ("database"); $query = "INSERT INTO table (id,gender,first_name,second_name,id_number,home_number,cell_work,email_address,date) VALUES('NULL','".$gender."','".$first_name."','".$second_name."','".$id_number."','".$home_number."','".$cell_work."','".$email_address."','".$curDate."' )"; mysql_query($query) or die (mysql_error()); ?> Thanx in advance!

    Read the article

  • Splitting MS Access Database - Front End Part Location

    - by kristof
    One of the best practices as specified by Microsoft for Access Development is splitting Access application into 2 parts; Front End that hold all the object except tables and the Back End that holds the tables. The msdn page links there to the article Splitting Microsoft Access Databases to Improve Performance and Simplify Maintainability that describes the process in details. It is recommended that in multi user environment the Back End is stored on the server/shared folder while the Front End is distributed to each user. That implies that each time there are any changes made to the front end they need to be deployed to every user machine. My question is: Assuming that the users themselves do not have rights to modify the Front End part of the application what would be the drawbacks/dangers of leaving this on the server as well next to the Back End copy? I can see the performance issues here, but are there any dangers here like possible corruptions etc? Thank you EDIT Just to clarify, the scenario specified in question assumes one Front End stored on the server and shared by users. I understand that the recommendation is to have FE deployed to each user machine, but my question is more about what are the dangers if that is not done. E.g. when you are given an existing solution that uses the approach of both FE and BE on the server. Assuming the the performance is acceptable and the customer is reluctant to change the approach would you still push the change? And why exactly? For example the danger of possible data corruption would definitely be the strong enough argument, but is that the case? It is a part of follow up of my previous question From SQL Server to MS Access 2007

    Read the article

  • Building an *efficient* if/then interface for non-technical users to build flow-control in PHP

    - by Brendan
    I am currently building an internal tool to be used by our management to control the flow of traffic. I have built an if/then interface allowing the user to set conditions for certain outcomes, however it is inefficient to use the switch statement to control the flow. How can I improve the efficiency of my code? Example of code: if($previous['route_id'] == $condition['route_id'] && $failed == 0) //if we have not moved on to a new set of rules and we haven't failed yet { switch($condition['type']) { case 0 : $type = $user['hour']; break; case 1 : $type = $user['location']['region_abv']; break; case 2 : $type = $user['referrer_domain']; break; case 3 : $type = $user['affiliate']; break; case 4 : $type = $user['location']['country_code']; break; case 5 : $type = $user['location']['city']; break; } $type = strtolower($type); $condition['value'] = strtolower($condition['value']); switch($condition['operator']) { case 0 : if($type == $condition['value']); else $failed = '1'; break; case 1 : if($type != $condition['value']); else $failed = '1'; break; case 2 : if($type > $condition['value']); else $failed = '1'; break; case 3 : if($type >= $condition['value']); else $failed = '1'; break; case 4 : if($type < $condition['value']); else $failed = '1'; break; case 5 : if($type <= $condition['value']); else $failed = '1'; break; } }

    Read the article

  • Store JsTree order back into database

    - by Scott
    Hi I am using JsTree and got some of it working with my database. Such as deleting a node, renaming a node, etc. I am having problems with saving the ROOT folders order back to the database. When I move the root folders, it doesnt save order. When I move the sub folders around, it saves order fine. Anyone know what I am doing wrong? I think it's my javascript for the onmove. here's a demo of what I am talking about. http://healthsharing.com/jstree/demo.php

    Read the article

  • PostGIS - can't create spatially-enabled database

    - by itgorilla
    I'm using Ubuntu 10.10, PostgreSQL 9.0 and PostGIS 1.5. I've installed PostGIS 1.5 from: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntugis-unstable I used PPA first then the command: sudo apt-get install postgis to install postgis. I've been following these instructions to create a spatially-enabled database: http://ostgis.refractions.net/docs/ch02.html#id2630100 I got to the point where it's saying: Now load the PostGIS object and function definitions into your database by loading the postgis.sql definitions file (located in [prefix]/share/contrib as specified during the configuration step). psql -d [yourdatabase] -f postgis.sql Well, there is no postgis.sql on my server after the installation. I did an sudo updatedb to make sure I can find postgis.sql but it's not there. Any ideas? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Calculation with RESTful web service with MySQL database

    - by Dobby
    I am now making some RESTful web services with MySQL database. I used NetBeans to create the resources of RESTful service with MySQL, and now I can now use GET and POST/PUT to list and add/modify data entities in the MySQL server. Currently, I wish to make some calculations right after a client makes the POST activities, then the posted data with calculated results will be inserted into the MySQL database. I am very new to this, I guess I need to add some functions and call them to calculate but I don't know where and how to do that : ( Could any one help me on this issue? Thanks a lot in advance! : )

    Read the article

  • Restoring database with SMO - Reporting progress problems

    - by madlan
    I'm using the below to restore a database in VB.NET. This works but causes the interface to lockup if the user clicks anything. Also, I cannot get the progress label to update incrementally, it's blank until the backup is complete then displays 100% Sub DoRestore() Dim svr As Server = New Server("Server\SQL2008") Dim res As Restore = New Restore() res.Devices.AddDevice("C:\MyDB.bak", DeviceType.File) res.Database = "MyDB" res.RelocateFiles.Add(New RelocateFile("MyDB_Data", "C:\MyDB.mdf")) res.RelocateFiles.Add(New RelocateFile("MyDB_Log", "C:\MyDB.ldf")) res.PercentCompleteNotification = 1 AddHandler res.PercentComplete, AddressOf ProgressEventHandler res.SqlRestore(svr) End Sub Private Sub ProgressEventHandler(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As PercentCompleteEventArgs) Label3.Text = "" ProgressBar.Value = e.Percent LblProgress.Text = e.Percent.ToString End Sub

    Read the article

  • Are database triggers evil?

    - by WW
    Are database triggers a bad idea? In my experience they are evil, because they can result in surprising side effects, and are difficult to debug (especially when one trigger fires another). Often developers do not even think of looking if there is a trigger. On the other hand, it seems like if you have logic that must occur evertime a new FOO is created in the database then the most foolproof place to put it is an insert trigger on the FOO table. The only time we're using triggers is for really simple things like setting the ModifiedDate.

    Read the article

  • How should I manage my many-to-many relationships?

    - by wes
    Hello all, I have a database containing a couple tables: files and users. This relationship is many-to-many, so I also have a table called users_files_ref which holds foreign keys to both of the above tables. Here's the schema of each table: files - file_id, file_name users - user_id, user_name users_files_ref - user_file_ref_id, user_id, file_id I'm using Codeigniter to build a file host application, and I'm right in the middle of adding the functionality that enables users to upload files. This is where I'm running into my problem. Once I add a file to the files table, I will need that new file's id to update the users_files_ref table. Right now I'm adding the record to the files table, and then I imagined I'd run a query to grab the last file added, so that I can get the ID, and then use that ID to insert the new users_files_ref record. I know this will work on a small scale, but I imagine there is a better way of managing these records, especially in a heavy-traffic scenario. I am new to relational database stuff but have been around PHP for a while, so please bear with me here :-) I have primary and foreign keys set up correctly for the files, users, and users_files_ref tables, I'm just wondering how to manage the adding of file records for this scenario? Thanks for any help provided, it's much appreciated. -Wes

    Read the article

  • a better way to initialize database ONCE when rail server starts

    - by Hadi
    i would like to initialize database the first time the server is started, that involve calling a class method. Given the class name is: Product At first i put an .rb file config\initializers\init.rb as it gets automatically called. Everything works ok, until the database is deleted, and i am trying to do rake db:migrate. rake db:migrate fails saying that cannot find 'product' table. inside init.rb = Product.populate_db The solution i came up is: I took out init.rb do rake db:migrate put back init.rb run the server. My rails application is mainly for reporting and the data is seeded from other application, so i have to do the above step everyday Is there a better way to do the initialization?

    Read the article

  • Multiple Tables or Multiple Schema

    - by Yan Cheng CHEOK
    http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1152405/postgresql-is-better-using-multiple-databases-with-1-schema-each-or-1-database I am new in schema concept for PostgreSQL. For the above mentioned scenario, I was wondering Why don't we use a single database (with default schema named public) Why don't we have a single table, to store multiple users row? Other tables which hold users related information, with foreign key point to the user table. Can anyone provide me a real case scenario, which single database, multiple schema will be extremely useful, and can't solve by conventional single database, single schema.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238  | Next Page >