Search Results

Search found 4882 results on 196 pages for 'odd behaviour'.

Page 26/196 | < Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >

  • IE6 does not follow 302 redirect - displays 404 instead

    - by Dexter
    One of our clients has reported that they are experiencing 404 (file not found) errors when attempting to navigate a website that we support. The behaviour only appears to affect her - other users on the same machine can navigate the website fine, but the problem follows her from one PC to another. I've had a good look through the IIS server logs and have identified the requests in question. The normal request pattern is as follows: POST /page.aspx - 80 - ... 401 1 0 POST /page.aspx - 80 DOMAIN/user ... 302 0 0 GET /anotherPage.aspx Request=833f80a5-f34c-4b0e-addb-d73e1ee1663a 80 - ... 401 1 0 GET /anotherPage.aspx Request=833f80a5-f34c-4b0e-addb-d73e1ee1663a 80 DOMAIN/user ... 200 0 However, requests for the affected user do not include a request for the redirected page, nor an entry for the 404, i.e.: POST /page.aspx - 80 - ... 401 1 0 POST /page.aspx - 80 DOMAIN/user ... 302 0 0 ... other unrelated requests Can anyone suggest what might trigger this behaviour, and how I might investigate the cause or prevent it from occuring? I read here that the Allow META refresh option in IE6 might trigger this behaviour, but I have not been able to replicate the behaviour by modifying this setting only.

    Read the article

  • How to stop Word 2011 opening hyperlinks on click?

    - by John Yeates
    In previous versions of MS Word, there was a preference for the action to be taken when the user clicked a hyperlink: open it, or edit it. Word 2011 appears to have defaulted to opening the hyperlink, and I can't find the preference to change this behaviour. How can I change Word's default behaviour when a hyperlink is clicked to be editing the text of the hyperlink? Holding down a modifier key when clicking is not an acceptable solution, as the aim here is to prevent misclicks from causing web pages to open. Edit: the links need to stay as links in the saved document. But when clicked on my machine, they should not open; Word needs to default to just editing the link, so an inaccurate click does not take me out of the document into Safari. Older versions of Word had a preference controlling this, and Microsoft seem to have removed it and fixed the behaviour at the unsafe option in order to satisfy the point-and-drool crowd.

    Read the article

  • TOP CPU usage for whole system

    - by heike
    I am using a machine that has using cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep processor | wc -l returning 8 I am trying to load the server using a load generator that I wrote, and capture the behaviour of TOP command for idle (as the software that is tested on server runs on ROOT). Doing the load as an increasing step function, I capture the idle state every second, and see the result. Strange thing is that when I increase the load every 1 minute, the idle state is infact increasing (??). This honestly does not make sense .. I thought with more load, the idle state will decrease, and the cpu usage will increase. Is there any reasonable explanation for this behaviour, maybe for the server utilization itself? Thanks for any feedback -- ok, no idea for the down vote. but I try to find this behaviour a lot, can not find any reasonable things to explain this ..

    Read the article

  • RAM caching causes severe performance drops

    - by B T
    I have read plenty of threads on memory caching and the standard response of "large cache is good, it shouldn't effect performance", "the kernel knows best". I have recently upgraded from 12.04 to 12.10 and changed from VirtualBox to VMware Workstation and the performance differences are severe (I suspect it is because of the latter). When I am running my virtual machine the system load monitor graph shows less than 50% memory usage generally. System load indicator is showing me that the rest of my RAM is used in the cache all the time. Plain and simple this is the comparison: BEFORE Cache was very sparingly used, pretty much none of my memory usage was the cache Swappiness was 0 (caused my memory to be used first, then swap only if needed) Performance was quite good and logical RAM was used fully first, caching was minimal. I could run enough software to utilize my full 4GB of RAM without any performance degradation whatsoever Swap space was then used as needed which was obviously slower (I am on a HDD) but was still usable when the current program was loaded into memory AFTER Cache is used to fill the full 4GB as soon as my virtual machine is run Swappiness is 0 (same behaviour as before but cache uses full memory straight away) Performance is terrible and unusable while running Ubuntu software Basic things like changing windows takes 2 minutes + Changing screens happens frame by frame over sometimes up to 5 minutes Cannot run an IDE and VM like I could with ease before So basically, any suggestions on how to take my performance back to how it was before while keeping my current setup? My suspicion is VMWare is the problem, but how do I see what is tied to the use of the cache? Surely there is a way to control this behaviour in software as polished as VMware? Thanks EDIT: Could also be important to note that the behaviour differs depending on whether VMware is open or closed. If VMware is open, then the ram will lock at like 50% and 50% cache and go into the complete lock up mentioned above. Contrastingly, if VMware is closed (after being open), then the RAM will continue to rise as it needs / cache will stay as the complete remaining memory and there is no noticeable performance degradation.

    Read the article

  • The Bing Sting - an alternative opinion

    - by Charles Young
    I know I'm a bit of an MS fanboy at times, but please, am I missing something here? Microsoft, with permission of users, exploits clickstream data gathered by observing user behaviour. One use for this data is to improve Bing queries. Google equips twenty of its engineers with laptops and installs the widgets required to provide Microsoft with clickstream data. It then gets their engineers to repeatedly (I assume) type in 'synthetic' queries which bring back 'doctored' hits. It asks its engineers to then click these results (think about this!). So, the behaviour of the engineers is observed and the resulting clickstream data goes off to Microsoft. It is processed and 'improves' Bing results accordingly.   What exactly did Microsoft do wrong here?   Google's so-called 'Bing sting' is clearly a very effective attack from a propaganda perspective, but is poor practice from a company that claims to do no evil. Generating and sending clickstream data deliberately so that you can then subsequently claim that your competitor 'copied' that data from you is neither fair nor reasonable, and suggests to me a degree of desperation in the face of real competition.   Monopolies are undesirable, whether they are Microsoft monopolies or Google monopolies.    Personally, I'm glad Microsoft has technology in place to observe user behaviour (with permission, of course) and improve their search results using such data. I can only assume Google doesn't implement similar capabilities. Sounds to me as if, at least in this respect, Microsoft may offer the better technology.

    Read the article

  • tdd is about design not verification what does it concretely mean?

    - by sigo
    I've been wondering about this. What do we exactly mean by design and verification. Should I just apply tdd to make sure my code is SOLID and not check is correct external behaviour ? Should I use Bdd for the correct behaviour part ? Where I get confused also is regarding TDD code katas, to me they looked like more about verification than design... shouldn't they be called bdd katas instead of tdd katas? I reckon that for example uncle bob bowling kata leads in the end to a simple and nice internal design but I felt that most of the process was more around vérification than design. Design seemed to be a side effect of testing incrementally the external behaviour. I didnt feel so much that we were focusing most of our efforts on design but more on vérification. While normally we are told the contrary, that in TDD, verification is a side effect, design is the main purpose. So my question is what should i focus exactly on when i do tdd: SOLID, external Api usability, what else...? And how can I do that without being focused on verification ? What do you guys focus your energy on when you are practicing TDD ?

    Read the article

  • How to factorize code in Unreal Kismet (i.e. "Material Function"s for Kismet)

    - by Georges Dupéron
    In the Unreal Development Kit, when using the Material Editor, one can factorize frequently-used groups of nodes by creating a Material Function (content Browser ? right-click ? new matrial function, IIRC). When defining the behaviour of some actor in Kismet, one can easily have a dozen nodes involved. If I have many actors that share the same behaviour, then I'll copy-paste these nodes, and change the variables so they point to the other actors. This leads to inconsistencies (a modification in the behaviour of an actor isn't propagated in the copy-pasted nodes), complexity (you end up with hundreds of nodes), and generally useless effort. My question is : Can I create a "kismet function", just like a material function ? Note: I'd rather avoid using UnrealScript. I don't even know where to type UnrealScripts, don't know where the documentation is and more generally don't have enough time to invest in learning UnrealScript. This "kismet function" feature must be usable by graphists (with little programming knowledge). If a (simple) script suffices to add this feature in the Kismet editor, so that one can create several "functions" without using UnrealScript, then fine, but I don't really want to have to write a script each time I want to factorize a few nodes. Thanks for any information !

    Read the article

  • "TDD is about design, not verification"; concretely, what does that mean?

    - by sigo
    I've been wondering about this. What do we exactly mean by design and verification. Should I just apply TDD to make sure my code is SOLID and not check if it's external behaviour is correct? Should I use BDD for verifying the behaviour is correct? Where I get confused also is regarding TDD code Katas, to me they looked like more about verification than design; shouldn't they be called BDD Katas instead of TDD Katas? I reckon that for example the Uncle Bob bowling Kata leads in the end to a simple and nice internal design but I felt that most of the process was centred more around verification than design. Design seemed to be a side effect of testing the external behaviour incrementally. I didn't feel so much that we were focusing most of our efforts on design but more on verification. While normally we are told the contrary, that in TDD, verification is a side effect, design is the main purpose. So my question is what should I focus on exactly, when I do TDD: SOLID, external API usability, or something else? And how can I do that without being focused on verification? What do you guys focus your energy on when you are practising TDD?

    Read the article

  • Do you write unit tests for all the time in TDD?

    - by mcaaltuntas
    I have been designing and developing code with TDD style for a long time. What disturbs me about TDD is writing tests for code that does not contain any business logic or interesting behaviour. I know TDD is a design activity more than testing but sometimes I feel it's useless to write tests in these scenarios. For example I have a simple scenario like "When user clicks check button, it should check file's validity". For this scenario I usually start writing tests for presenter/controller class like the one below. @Test public void when_user_clicks_check_it_should_check_selected_file_validity(){ MediaService service =mock(MediaService); View view =mock(View); when(view.getSelectedFile).thenReturns("c:\\Dir\\file.avi"); MediaController controller =new MediaController(service,view); controller.check(); verify(service).check("c:\\Dir\\file.avi"); } As you can see there is no design decision or interesting code to verify behaviour. I am testing values from view passed to MediaService. I usually write but don't like these kind of tests. What do yo do about these situations ? Do you write tests for all the time ? UPDATE : I have changed the test name and code after complaints. Some users said that you should write tests for the trivial cases like this so in the future someone might add interesting behaviour. But what about “Code for today, design for tomorrow.” ? If someone, including myself, adds more interesting code in the future the test can be created for it then. Why should I do it now for the trivial cases ?

    Read the article

  • RegexClean Transformation

    Use the power of regular expressions to cleanse your data right there inside the Data Flow. This transformation includes a full user interface for simple configuration, as well as advanced features such as error output configuration. Two regular expressions are used, a match expression and a replace expression. The transformation is designed around the named capture groups or match groups, and even supports multiple expressions. This allows for rich and complex expressions to be built, all through an easy to reuse transformation where a bespoke Script Component was previously the only alternative. Some simple properties are available for each column selected – Behaviour The two behaviour modes offer similar functionality but with a difference. Replace, replaces tokens with the input, and Emit overwrites the whole string. Cascade Cascade allows you to define multiple expressions, each on a new line. The match expression will be processed into one operation per line, which are then processed in order at run-time. Multiple replace expressions can also be specified, again each on a new line. If there is no corresponding replace expression for a match expression line, then the last replace expression will be used instead. It is common to have multiple match expressions, but only a single replace expression. Match Expression The expression used to define the named capture groups. This is where you can analyse the data, and tag or name elements within it as found by the match expression. Replace Expression The replace determines the final output. It will reference the named groups from the match expression and assembles them into the final output. If you want to use regular expressions to validate data then try the Regular Expression Transformation. Quick Start Guide Select a column. A new output column is created for each selected column; there is no option for in-place replacement of column values. One input column can be used to populate multiple output columns, just select the column again in the lower grid, using the Input Columns drop-down selector. Amend the output column name and size as required. They default to the same as the input column selected. Amend the behaviour as required, the default is Replace. Amend the cascade option as required, the default is true. Finally enter your match and replace regular expressions Quick Sample #1 Parse an email address and extract the user and domain portions. Format as a web address passing the user portion as a URL parameter. This uses two match groups, user and host, which correspond to the text before the @ and after it respectively. Behaviour is Emit, and cascade of false, we only have a single match expression. Match Expression ^(?<user>[^@]+)@(?<host>.+)$ Replace Expression - http://www.${host}?user=${user} Results Sample Input Sample Output [email protected] http://www.adventure-works.com?user=zheng0 The component is provided as an MSI file, however to complete the installation, you will have to add the transformation to the Visual Studio toolbox manually. Right-click the toolbox, and select Choose Items.... Select the SSIS Data Flow Items tab, and then check the RegexClean Transformation from the list. Downloads The RegexClean Transformation is available for both SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2008. Please choose the version to match your SQL Server version, or you can install both versions and use them side by side if you have both SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2008 installed. RegexClean Transformation for SQL Server 2005 RegexClean Transformation for SQL Server 2008 Version History SQL Server 2005 Version 1.0.0.105 - Public Release (28 Jan 2008) SQL Server 2005 Version 1.0.0.105 - Public Release (28 Jan 2008) Screenshot

    Read the article

  • The SmartAssembly Rearchitecture

    - by Simon Cooper
    You may have noticed that not a lot has happened to SmartAssembly in the past few months. However, the team has been very busy behind the scenes working on an entirely new version of SmartAssembly. SmartAssembly 6.5 Over the past few releases of SmartAssembly, the team had come to the realisation that the current 'architecture' - grown organically, way before RedGate bought it, from a simple name obfuscator over the years into a full-featured obfuscator and assembly instrumentation tool - was simply not up to the task. Not for what we wanted to do with it at the time, and not what we have planned for the future. Not only was it not up to what we wanted it to do, but it was severely limiting our development capabilities; long-standing bugs in the root architecture that couldn't be fixed, some rather...interesting...design decisions, and convoluted logic that increased the complexity of any bugfix or new feature tenfold. So, we set out to fix this. Earlier this year, a new engine was written on which SmartAssembly would be based. Over the following few months, each feature was ported over to the new engine and extensively tested by our existing unit and integration tests. The engine was linked into the existing UI (no easy task, due to the tight coupling between the UI and old engine), and existing RedGate products were tested on the new SmartAssembly to ensure the new engine acted in the same way. The result is SmartAssembly 6.5. The risks of a rearchitecture Are there risks to rearchitecting a product like SmartAssembly? Of course. There was a lot of undocumented behaviour in the old engine, and as part of the rearchitecture we had to find this behaviour, define it, and document it. In the process we found some behaviour of the old engine that simply did not make sense; hence the changes in pruning & obfuscation behaviour in the release notes. All the special edge cases we had to find, document, and re-implement. There was a chance that these special cases would not be found until near the end of the project, when everything is functionally complete and interacting together. By that stage, it would be hard to go back and change anything without a whole lot of extra work, delaying the release by months. We always knew this was a possibility; our initial estimate of the time required was '4 months, ± 4 months'. And that was including various mitigation strategies to reduce the likelihood of these issues being found right at the end. Fortunately, this worst-case did not happen. However, the rearchitecture did produce some benefits. As well as numerous bug fixes that we could not fix any other way, we've also added logging that lets you find out exactly why a particular field or property wasn't pruned or obfuscated. There's a new command line interface, we've tested it with WP7.1 and Silverlight 5, and we've added a new option to error reporting to improve the performance of instrumented apps by ~10%, at the cost of inaccurate line numbers in reports. So? What differences will I see? Largely none. SmartAssembly 6.5 produces the same output as SmartAssembly 6.2. The performance of 6.5 will be much faster for some users, and generally the same as 6.2 for the remaining. If you've encountered a bug with previous versions of SmartAssembly, I encourage you to try 6.5, as it has most likely been fixed in the rearchitecture. If you encounter a bug with 6.5, please do tell us; we'll be doing another release quite soon, so we'll aim to fix any issues caused by 6.5 in that release. Most importantly, the new architecture finally allows us to implement some Big Things with SmartAssembly we've been planning for many months; these will fundamentally change how you build, release and monitor your application. Stay tuned for further updates!

    Read the article

  • pattern matching in .Net consistent with IsolatedStorageFile.GetFileNames() pattern matching

    - by Mick N
    Is the pattern matching logic used by this API exposed for reuse somewhere in the .Net Framework? Something of the form FilePatternMatch( string searchPattern, stringfileNameToTest ) is what I'm looking for. I'm implementing a temporary workaround for WP7 not filtering the results for this overload and I'd like the solution to both provide a consistent experience and avoid reinventing this functionality if it is exposed. If the behaviour is not exposed for reuse, a regular expression solution (like glob pattern matching in .NET) will suffice and would save me spending the time to test the fine details of what the behaviour should be. Perhaps one of the answers posted in the thread linked above is correct. Since I haven't confirmed the exact behaviour as yet, I wasn't able to determine this at a glance. Feel free to point me to one of those answers if you know it is behaviouraly an exact match to the API referenced in the question title. I could assume the pattern matching is consistent with how DOS handled * and ? in 8.3 file names (I'm familiar with behavioural nuances of that implementation), but it's reasonable to assume Microsoft has evolved pattern matching behaviour for file names in the decade+ since so I thought I would check before proceeding on that assumption.

    Read the article

  • Where do you take mocking - immediate dependencies, or do you grow the boundaries...?

    - by Peter Mounce
    So, I'm reasonably new to both unit testing and mocking in C# and .NET; I'm using xUnit.net and Rhino Mocks respectively. I'm a convert, and I'm focussing on writing behaviour specifications, I guess, instead of being purely TDD. Bah, semantics; I want an automated safety net to work above, essentially. A thought struck me though. I get programming against interfaces, and the benefits as far as breaking apart dependencies goes there. Sold. However, in my behaviour verification suite (aka unit tests ;-) ), I'm asserting behaviour one interface at a time. As in, one implementation of an interface at a time, with all of its dependencies mocked out and expectations set up. The approach seems to be that if we verify that a class behaves as it should against its collaborating dependencies, and in turn relies on each of those collaborating dependencies to have signed that same quality contract, we're golden. Seems reasonable enough. Back to the thought, though. Is there any value in semi-integration tests, where a test-fixture is asserting against a unit of concrete implementations that are wired together, and we're testing its internal behaviour against mocked dependencies? I just re-read that and I think I could probably have worded it better. Obviously, there's going to be a certain amount of "well, if it adds value for you, keep doing it", I suppose - but has anyone else thought about doing that, and reaped benefits from it outweighing the costs?

    Read the article

  • how to fix my error saying expected expression before 'else'

    - by user292489
    this program intended to read a .txt, a set of numbers, file and wwrite to another two .txt files called even amd odd as follows: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int i=0,even,odd; int number[i]; // check to make sure that all the file names are entered if (argc != 3) { printf("Usage: executable in_file output_file\n"); exit(0); } FILE *dog = fopen(argv[1], "r"); FILE *feven= fopen(argv[2], "w"); FILE *fodd= fopen (argv[3], "w"); // check whether the file has been opened successfully if (dog == NULL) { printf("File %s cannot open!\n", argv[1]); exit(0); } //odd = fopen(argv[2], "w"); { if (i%2!=1) i++;} fprintf(feven, "%d", even); fscanf(dog, "%d", &number[i]); else { i%2==1; i++;} fprintf(fodd, "%d", odd); fscanf(dog, "%d", &number[i]); fclose(feven); fclose(fodd);

    Read the article

  • Practice of checking 'trueness' or 'equality' in conditional statements - does it really make sense?

    - by Senthil
    I remember many years back, when I was in school, one of my computer science teachers taught us that it was better to check for 'trueness' or 'equality' of a condition and not the negative stuff like 'inequality'. Let me elaborate - If a piece of conditional code can be written by checking whether an expression is true or false, we should check the 'trueness'. Example: Finding out whether a number is odd - it can be done in two ways: if ( num % 2 != 0 ) { // Number is odd } or if ( num % 2 == 1 ) { // Number is odd } When I was beginning to code, I knew that num % 2 == 0 implies the number is even, so I just put a ! there to check if it is odd. But he was like 'Don't check NOT conditions. Have the practice of checking the 'trueness' or 'equality' of conditions whenever possible.' And he recommended that I use the second piece of code. I am not for or against either but I just wanted to know - what difference does it make? Please don't reply 'Technically the output will be the same' - we ALL know that. Is it a general programming practice or is it his own programming practice that he is preaching to others?

    Read the article

  • Practice of checking 'trueness' or 'equality' of conditional statements - does it really make sense?

    - by senthilkumar1033
    I remember many years back, when I was in school, one of my computer science teachers taught us that it was better to check for 'trueness' or 'equality' of a condition and not the negative stuff like 'inequality'. Let me elaborate - If a piece of conditional code can be written by checking whether an expression is true or false, we should check the 'trueness'. Example: Finding out whether a number is odd - it can be done in two ways: if ( num % 2 != 0 ) { // Number is odd } or if ( num % 2 == 1 ) { // Number is odd } When I was beginning to code, I knew that num % 2 == 0 implies the number is even, so I just put a ! there to check if it is odd. But he was like 'Don't check NOT conditions. Have the practice of checking the 'trueness' or 'equality' of conditions whenever possible.' And he recommended that I use the second piece of code. I am not for or against either but I just wanted to know - what difference does it make? Please don't reply 'Technically the output will be the same' - we ALL know that. Is it a general programming practice or is it his own programming practice that he is preaching to others?

    Read the article

  • Issue in alternate Row color using each() method of JQuery

    - by user1323981
    I have a table as under <table > <tr> <th scope="col">EmpId</th><th scope="col">EmpName</th> </tr> <tr> <td>1</td><td>ABC</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2</td><td>DEF</td> </tr> </table> I want to set the alternate row color of only the "td" elements of the table and not "th" by using only each() function. I have tried with <style type="text/css"> tr.even { background-color: green; } tr.odd { background-color: yellow; } </style> $(document).ready(function () { $('table > tbody').each(function () { $('tr:odd', this).addClass('odd').removeClass('even'); $('tr:even', this).addClass('even').removeClass('odd'); }); }); Though this works but it accepts also "th" element. How to avoid that? Please help Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why people don't patch and upgrade?!?

    - by Mike Dietrich
    Discussing the topic "Why Upgrade" or "Why not Upgrade" is not always fun. Actually the arguments repeat from customer to customer. Typically we hear things such as: A PSU or Patch Set introduces new bugs A new PSU or Patch Set introduces new features which lead to risk and require application verification  Patching means risk Patching changes the execution plans Patching requires too much testing Patching is too much work for our DBAs Patching costs a lot of money and doesn't pay out And to be very honest sometimes it's hard for me to stay calm in such discussions. Let's discuss some of these points a bit more in detail. A PSU or Patch Set introduces new bugsWell, yes, that is true as no software containing more than some lines of code is bug free. This applies to Oracle's code as well as too any application or operating system code. But first of all, does that mean you never patch your OS because the patch may introduce new flaws? And second, what is the point of saying "it introduces new bugs"? Does that mean you will never get rid of the mean issues we know about and we fixed already? Scroll down from MOS Note:161818.1 to the patch release you are on, no matter if it's 10.2.0.4 or 11.2.0.3 and check for the Known Issues And Alerts.Will you take responsibility to know about all these issues and refuse to upgrade to 11.2.0.4? I won't. A new PSU or Patch Set introduces new featuresOk, we can discuss that. Offering new functionality within a database patch set is a dubious thing. It has advantages such as in 11.2.0.4 where we backported Database Redaction to. But this is something you will only use once you have an Advanced Security license. I interpret that statement I've heard quite often from customers in a different way: People don't want to get surprises such as new behaviour. This certainly gives everybody a hard time. And we've had many examples in the past (SESSION_CACHED_CURSROS in 10.2.0.4,  _DATAFILE_WRITE_ERRORS_CRASH_INSTANCE in 11.2.0.2 and others) where those things weren't documented, not even in the README. Thanks to many friends out there I learned about those as well. So new behaviour is the topic people consider as risky - not really new features. And just to point this out: A PSU never brings in new features or new behaviour by definition! Patching means riskDoes it really mean risk? Yes, there were issues in the past (and sometimes in the present as well) where a patch didn't get installed correctly. But personally I consider it way more risky to not patch. Keep that in mind: The day Oracle publishes an PSU (or CPU) containing security fixes all the great security experts out there go public with their findings as well. So from that day on even my grandma can find out about those issues and try to attack somebody. Now a lot of people say: "My database does not face the internet." And I will answer: "The enemy is sitting already behind your firewalls. And knows potentially about these things." My statement: Not patching introduces way more risk to your environment than patching. Seriously! Patching changes the execution plansDo they really? I agree - there's a very small risk for this happening with Patch Sets. But not with PSUs or CPUs as they contain no optimizer fixes changing behaviour (but they may contain fixes curing wrong-query-result-bugs). But what's the point of a changing execution plan? In Oracle Database 11g it is so simple to be prepared. SQL Plan Management is a free EE feature - so once that occurs you'll put the plan into the Plan Baseline. Basta! Yes, you wouldn't like to get such surprises? Than please use the SQL Performance Analyzer (SPA) from Real Application Testing and you'll detect that easily upfront in minutes. And not to forget this, a plan change can also be very positive!Yes, there's a little risk with a database patchset - and we have many possibilites to detect this before patching. Patching requires too much testingWell, does it really? I have seen in the past 12 years how people test. There are very different efforts and approaches on this. I have seen people spending a hell of money on licenses or on project team staffing. And I have seen people sailing blindly without any tests just going the John-Wayne-approach.Proper tools will allow you to test easily without too much efforts. See the paragraph above. We have used Real Application Testing in so many customer projects reducing the amount of work spend on testing by over 50%. But apart from that at some point you will have to stop testing. If you don't you'll get lost and you'll burn money. There's no 100% guaranty. You will have to deal with a little risk as reaching the final 5% of certainty will cost you the same as it did cost to reach 95%. And doing this will lead to abnormal long product cycles that you'll run behind forever. And this will cost even more money. Patching is too much work for our DBAsPatching is a lot of work. I agree. And it's no fun work. It's boring, annoying. You don't learn much from that. That's why you should try to automate this task. Use the Database's Lifecycle Management Pack. And don't cry about the fact that it costs money. Yes it does. But it will ease the process and you'll save a lot of costs as you don't waste your valuable time with patching. Or use Oracle Database 12c Oracle Multitenant and patch either by unplug/plug or patch an entire container database with all PDBs with one patch in one task. We have customer reference cases proofing it saved them 75% of time, effort and cost since they've used Lifecycle Management Pack. So why don't you use it? Patching costs a lot of money and doesn't pay outWell, see my statements in the paragraph above. And it pays out as flying with a database with 100 known critical flaws in it which are already fixed by Oracle (such as in the Oct 2013 PSU for Oracle Database 12c) will cost ways more in case of failure or even data loss. Bet with me? Let me finally ask you some questions. What cell phone are you using and which OS does it run? Do you have an iPhone 5 and did you upgrade already to iOS 7.0.3? I've just encountered on mine that the alarm (which I rely on when traveling) has gotten now a dependency on the physical switch "sound on/off". If it is switched to "off" physically the alarm rings "silently". What a wonderful example of a behaviour change coming in with a patch set. Will this push you to stay with iOS5 or iOS6? No, because those have security flaws which won't be fixed anymore. What browser are you surfing with? Do you use Mozilla 3.6? Well, congratulations to all the hackers. It will be easy for them to attack you and harm your system. I'd guess you have the auto updater on.  Same for Google Chrome, Safari, IE. Right? -Mike The T.htmtableborders, .htmtableborders td, .htmtableborders th {border : 1px dashed lightgrey ! important;} html, body { border: 0px; } body { background-color: #ffffff; } img, hr { cursor: default }

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 Ultimate Restore From Another Machine

    - by Guy Thomas
    The situation I have an old machine running Windows Server 2008. I make a backup of selected directories. New Machine: I install Windows 7 Ultimate (and Windows Server 2008 [dual boot]) I cannot restore those files that I backed-up on the old machine. On the New machine neither the Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008 Restore (Recovery) can 'see' the backup files even though they are on the local machine. Is this behaviour (non-behaviour) 'by design' or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • configure domino web server to use internet site document?

    - by kasper_341
    internet site configurations view has - security options - Accept SSL site certificates: default is NO Accept expired SSL certificates: default is Yes question: how does this effect server behaviour ? e.g. if i change the default behaviour -Accept SSL site certificates to yes then what effect will it have on server ? i hope the questions is clear enough, if not please let me know i will rephrase it. thanks

    Read the article

  • Sub-classing TreeView in C# WinForms for mouse over tool tips

    - by Matt
    Ok, this is a weird one. The expected behaviour for a TreeView control is that, if ShowNodeToolTips is set to false, then, when a label for a tree node exceeds the width of the control (or, more accurately, it's right hand edge is past the right hand edge of the client area), then a tooltip is shown above the node showing the full item's text. I'd like to disable that, because the above semantic doesn't always work, depending on what the treeview is contained within. So I have rolled my own, and got the tooltips to work (and line up better than the default one!) - but I would like to be able to disable the 'default' behaviour for situations where it would work natively. So, can anyone point me in the right direction as to which message to post to the TreeView in order to disable that behaviour? I have looked at the windows control reference, but couldn't find anything that looked like it might be the one. Thanks Matt

    Read the article

  • Sub-classing TreeView in WinForms for mouse over tool tips

    - by Matt
    Ok, this is a weird one. The expected behaviour for a TreeView control is that, if ShowNodeToolTips is set to false, then, when a label for a tree node exceeds the width of the control (or, more accurately, it's right hand edge is past the right hand edge of the client area), then a tooltip is shown above the node showing the full item's text. I'd like to disable that, because the above semantic doesn't always work, depending on what the treeview is contained within. So I have rolled my own, and got the tooltips to work (and line up better than the default one!) - but I would like to be able to disable the 'default' behaviour for situations where it would work natively. So, can anyone point me in the right direction as to which message to post to the TreeView in order to disable that behaviour? I have looked at the windows control reference, but couldn't find anything that looked like it might be the one.

    Read the article

  • Does Resharper 4.1 support both Camel Humps and normal selection modes?

    - by Jonathan Parker
    I've found the setting for Camel Humps in resharper: Resharper - Options - Editor - Use CamelHumps The problem is that I would still like to be able to use the normal selection mode (i.e. the default behaviour for CTRL+Arrow and CTRL+SHIFT+Arrow) as well as the CamelHumps mode. For example consider this variable: private int MyVeryLongCamelCaseName; Now if I want to copy the entire variable then I want the VS default behaviour for CTRL+SHIFT+Left-Arrow which is to select the entire variable if the cursor is on the M. However if I want to change the name to say MyExtremelyLongCamelCaseName then I would like the CamelHumps behaviour provided by Resharper. Is there any way to have both behaviours with different shortcuts?

    Read the article

  • SharePoint Lookup Field 20 Item JS error

    - by Chops
    Hi Everyone, I've got an issue with SharePoint Server 2007 SP1 which seems to be documented in various forms, but I haven't been able to find an answer to my seemingly simpler question. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/sharepointcustomization/thread/040533d2-c738-4ac2-b2d6-65a1602fa2d1 Essentially, we have a form with a lookup field to another SharePoint list. The lookup field has more than 20 items, and so SharePoint changes the type/behaviour of the field as per the standard behaviour. However, with my custom skin applied, clicking on this drop down causes a JS error from within the Core.js file, as described here: http://splitnut.blogspot.com/2009/06/lookup-fields-in-moss-javascript-error.html What I haven't been able to figure out is why this is only an issue when my custom master page is applied, and not the OOTB master pages. I've been through and tried to see what might cause this, but haven't been able to track down the cause of the behaviour. Any help would be much appreciated. Many thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >