Search Results

Search found 5945 results on 238 pages for 'supply chain planning'.

Page 28/238 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • Computer doesn't start at all

    - by Sniffer
    I have a desktop computer that won't start at all, I had it for years, and now suddenly when I press the power button I get no beeps, no fans spinning, no hard disk spinning. And the amazing thing that it sometimes works when I press the power button and every thing works normally. Sometimes it works after an hour, 10 hours or 10 minutes after I press the power button and this problem happens when electricity goes out and comes back. If I managed to turn the computer and no power outage happened. I am able to keep turning it on. But when the electricity goes off and on. And I press the power button it may turn on after an hour, two, 10 or not at all.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu cannot access internet, LAN is fine

    - by Kevin Southworth
    I have an Ubuntu 8.04 LTS server that is directly connected to our Comcast Business Gateway modem and I have configured it with 1 of our 5 allotted Static IPs. My other machines on our LAN can connect to this server (via ssh, web, ping, etc.) but I cannot access this server from outside our network, and this machine cannot get out to the internet either (ping google.com fails with unknown host). Here is my /etc/networking/interfaces file: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 173.162.54.19 netmask 255.255.255.248 broadcast 173.162.54.23 gateway 173.162.54.22 and my /etc/resolv.conf: nameserver 68.87.77.130 nameserver 68.87.72.130 output from sudo route -n: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 173.162.54.16 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.248 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 173.162.54.22 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 I have a Windows 2008 machine with an almost identical Static IP, static DNS setup and it works correctly, can access it within the LAN and also from public internet, the Windows machine and the Ubuntu machine are both directly connected to the Comcast Business Gateway. I have tried rebooting Ubuntu, rebooting my Comcast modem, but nothing seems to make it work. I'm an Ubuntu noob, is there some other config I need to apply to make this work? UPDATE: Yes I am able to ping my default gateway 173.162.54.22 output of iptables --list -n: Chain INPUT (policy DROP) target prot opt source destination ufw-before-input all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ufw-after-input all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy DROP) target prot opt source destination ufw-before-forward all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ufw-after-forward all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ufw-before-output all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ufw-after-output all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-after-forward (1 references) target prot opt source destination LOG all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 3/min burst 10 LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix `[UFW BLOCK FORWARD]: ' RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-after-input (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:137 RETURN udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:138 RETURN tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:139 RETURN tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:445 RETURN udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:67 RETURN udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:68 LOG all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 3/min burst 10 LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix `[UFW BLOCK INPUT]: ' RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-after-output (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-before-forward (1 references) target prot opt source destination ufw-user-forward all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-before-input (1 references) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED DROP all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ctstate INVALID ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 3 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 4 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 11 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 12 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 8 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:67 dpt:68 ufw-not-local all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 224.0.0.0/4 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 224.0.0.0/4 ufw-user-input all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-before-output (1 references) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED ufw-user-output all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-not-local (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ADDRTYPE match dst-type LOCAL RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ADDRTYPE match dst-type MULTICAST RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ADDRTYPE match dst-type BROADCAST LOG all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 3/min burst 10 LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix `[UFW BLOCK NOT-TO-ME]: ' DROP all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-user-forward (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-user-input (1 references) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:80 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:22 RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ufw-user-output (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0

    Read the article

  • Orchestrating the Virtual Enterprise, Part I

    - by Kathryn Perry
    A guest post by Jon Chorley, Oracle's Chief Sustainability Officer & Vice President, SCM Product Strategy During the American Industrial Revolution, the Ford Motor Company did it all. It turned raw materials into a showroom full of Model Ts. It owned a steel mill, a glass factory, and an automobile assembly line. The company was both self-sufficient and innovative and went on to become one of the largest and most profitable companies in the world. Nowadays, it's unusual for any business to follow this vertical integration model because its much harder to be best in class across such a wide a range of capabilities and services. Instead, businesses focus on their core competencies and outsource other business functions to specialized suppliers. They exchange vertical integration for collaboration. When done well, all parties benefit from this arrangement and the collaboration leads to the creation of an agile, lean and successful "virtual enterprise." Case in point: For Sun hardware, Oracle outsources most of its manufacturing and all of its logistics to third parties. These are vital activities, but ones where Oracle doesn't have a core competency, so we shift them to business partners who do. Within our enterprise, we always retain the core functions of product development, support, and most of the sales function, because that's what constitutes our core value to our customers. This is a perfect example of a virtual enterprise.  What are the implications of this? It means that we must exchange direct internal control for indirect external collaboration. This fundamentally changes the relative importance of different business processes, the boundaries of security and information sharing, and the relationship of the supply chain systems to the ERP. The challenge is that the systems required to support this virtual paradigm are still mired in "island enterprise" thinking. But help is at hand. Developments such as the Web, social networks, collaboration, and rules-based orchestration offer great potential to fundamentally re-architect supply chain systems to better support the virtual enterprise.  Supply Chain Management Systems in a Virtual Enterprise Historically enterprise software was constructed to automate the ERP - and then the supply chain systems extended the ERP. They were joined at the hip. In virtual enterprises, the supply chain system needs to be ERP agnostic, sitting above each of the ERPs that are distributed across the virtual enterprise - most of which are operating in other businesses. This is vital so that the supply chain system can manage the flow of material and the related information through the multiple enterprises. It has to have strong collaboration tools. It needs to be highly flexible. Users need to be able to see information that's coming from multiple sources and be able to react and respond to events across those sources.  Oracle Fusion Distributed Order Orchestration (DOO) is a perfect example of a supply chain system designed to operate in this virtual way. DOO embraces the idea that a company's fulfillment challenge is a distributed, multi-enterprise problem. It enables users to manage the process and the trading partners in a uniform way and deliver a consistent user experience while operating over a heterogeneous, virtual enterprise. This is a fundamental shift at the core of managing supply chains. It forces virtual enterprises to think architecturally about how best to construct their supply chain systems. In my next post, I will share examples of companies that have made that shift and talk more about the distributed orchestration process.

    Read the article

  • Design by contract: predict methods needed, discipline yourself and deal with code that comes to min

    - by fireeyedboy
    I like the idea of designing by contract a lot (at least, as far as I understand the principal). I believe it means you define intefaces first before you start implementing actual code, right? However, from my limited experience (3 OOP years now) I usually can't resist the urge to start coding pretty early, for several reasons: because my limited experience has shown me I am unable to predict what methods I will be needing in the interface, so I might as well start coding right away. or because I am simply too impatient to write out the whole interfaces first. or when I do try it, I still wind up implementing bits of code already, because I fear I might forget this or that imporant bit of code, that springs to mind when I am designing the interfaces. As you see, especially with the last two points, this leads to a very disorderly way of doing thing. Tasks get mixed up. I should draw a clear line between designing interfaces and actual coding. If you, unlike me, are a good/disciplined planner, as intended above, how do you: ...know the majority of methods you will be needing up front so well? Especially if it's components that implement stuff you are not familiar with yet. ...keep yourself from resisting the urge to start coding right away? ...deal with code that comes to mind when you are designing the intefaces?

    Read the article

  • What is better: set up underestimated or overestimated deadlines?

    - by sergdev
    Suppose you are a project manager. You can estimate an effort in days for specific task for specific developer. After performing estimation you obtain some min and max values. After this you delegate a task to developer. Actually you also set up deadline. Which estimation is better to use when set up deadline: min or max? As I see min estimation can result in stress for developer, max estimation can result in using all the time which is allocated to developer even if task can be complete faster (so called Student syndrome). Which other pros and cons of two approaches? Small clarification: I speak about setting up deadlines for subordinates when delegating the task, NOT for reporting to my boss.

    Read the article

  • Designing interfaces: predict methods needed, discipline yourself and deal with code that comes to m

    - by fireeyedboy
    Was: Design by contract: predict methods needed, discipline yourself and deal with code that comes to mind I like the idea of designing by contract a lot (at least, as far as I understand the principal). I believe it means you define intefaces first before you start implementing actual code, right? However, from my limited experience (3 OOP years now) I usually can't resist the urge to start coding pretty early, for several reasons: because my limited experience has shown me I am unable to predict what methods I will be needing in the interface, so I might as well start coding right away. or because I am simply too impatient to write out the whole interfaces first. or when I do try it, I still wind up implementing bits of code already, because I fear I might forget this or that imporant bit of code, that springs to mind when I am designing the interfaces. As you see, especially with the last two points, this leads to a very disorderly way of doing things. Tasks get mixed up. I should draw a clear line between designing interfaces and actual coding. If you, unlike me, are a good/disciplined planner, as intended above, how do you: ...know the majority of methods you will be needing up front so well? Especially if it's components that implement stuff you are not familiar with yet. ...resist the urge to start coding right away? ...deal with code that comes to mind when you are designing the interfaces? UPDATE: Thank you for the answers so far. Valuable insights! And... I stand corrected; it seems I misinterpreted the idea of Design By Contract. For clarity, what I actually meant was: "coming up with interface methods before implementing the actual components". An additional thing that came up in my mind is related to point 1): b) How do you know the majority of components you will be needing. How do you flesh out these things before you start actually coding? For arguments sake, let's say I'm a novice with the MVC pattern, and I wanted to implement such a component/architecture. A naive approach would be to think of: a front controller some abstract action controller some abstract view ... and be done with it, so to speak. But, being more familiar with the MVC pattern, I know now that it makes sense to also have: a request object a router a dispatcher a response object view helpers etc.. etc.. If you map this idea to some completely new component you want to develop, with which you have no experience yet; how do you come up with these sort of additional components without actually coding the thing, and stuble upon the ideas that way? How would you know up front how fine grained some components should be? Is this a matter of disciplining yourself to think it out thoroughly? Or is it a matter of being good at thinking in abstractions?

    Read the article

  • Use bug tracker to get things done and manage personal tasks?

    - by Frank
    This is slightly off-topic, but can only be answered by programmers and is useful to many programmers: Do you think it is useful to use a bug tracking system to keep track of personal todo items and to Get Things Done? I have not tried that; in fact, I don't have much experience with bug tracking systems. For my todo lists, I have played around with Google Tasks and Remember The Milk, but both of them have shortcomings: Google Tasks: I like that you can create todo lists easily, can reorder items in the list and easily create hierarchies. But it is way too simplistic and does not allow to tag tasks or move tasks from one list to another. Remember The Milk: It is nice and sleek, but you cannot create hierarchies of tasks, cannot arbitrarily reorder tasks and cannot set dependencies of tasks. That's where a bug tracking system should come in: Since I think (maybe too much?) like a programmer, my tasks have a natural hierarchy and a tree of dependencies, like in a Makefile. Here are two examples: The task of writing my thesis is done when several milestones are done. Some of these milestones can run in parallel (writing background chapter, running experiments A, running experiments B), others depend on each other (writing main chapter depends on first getting results from experiments A). The same is true for more personal goals: I want to host a dinner party, which requires finding a good date, finishing the guest list, making invitations, finding nice recipes, cooking, ... For me, all these tasks involve hierarchical dependencies and milestones that bug tracking systems should be able to handle? Here is an article that explains how to do advanced GTD with Remember The Milk, but he has to use several workarounds: (1) add a general tag 'wait' to tasks that are waiting for others to be completed but you cannot enter the IDs of the tasks that they are waiting for, (2) starting some special tasks with "." so that they are at the top of the alphabetically sorted list and signal that others are 'below' it as subgoals. Bug tracking systems should be able to handle these things much more naturally? Does anyone have experience and can recommend a lightweight bug tracking system that might be good for this? Other requirements: Should run as web app, should allow me to tag a task with several tags (like 'work', 'fun', 'short-task', 'errands', ...).

    Read the article

  • Caveats of select/poll vs. epoll reactors in Twisted

    - by David
    Everything I've read and experienced ( Tornado based apps ) leads me to believe that ePoll is a natural replacement for Select and Poll based networking, especially with Twisted. Which makes me paranoid, its pretty rare for a better technique or methodology not to come with a price. Reading a couple dozen comparisons between epoll and alternatives shows that epoll is clearly the champion for speed and scalability, specifically that it scales in a linear fashion which is fantastic. That said, what about processor and memory utilization, is epoll still the champ?

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to documentate a system metaphor?

    - by SDReyes
    A metaphor help us to communicate with our project stakeholders, using a shared set of concepts and analogies. we develop them all the time, in one way or another. even the XP- programming highly recommend to get it defined since project start. How do you write such thing down in a document (specially if it already exists)? maybe a dictionary-like approach?

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to document a system metaphor?

    - by SDReyes
    A metaphor help us to communicate with our project stakeholders, using a shared set of concepts and analogies. we develop them all the time, in one way or another. even the XP- programming highly recommend to get it defined since project start. How do you write such thing down in a document (specially if it already exists)? maybe a dictionary-like approach? UPDATE: perhaps a thesaurus would do it better (synonyms sum).

    Read the article

  • Organizing code, logical layout of segmented files

    - by David H
    I have known enough about programming to get me in trouble for about 10 years now. I have no formal education, though I've read many books on the subject for various languages. The language I am primarily focused on now would be php, atleast for the scale of things I am doing now. I have used some OOP classes for a while, but never took the dive into understanding principals behind the scenes. I am still not at the level I would like to be expression-wise...however my recent reading into a book titled The OOP Thought Process has me wanting to advance my programming skills. With motivation from the new concepts, I have started with a new project that I've coded some re-usable classes that deal with user auth, user profiles, database interfacing, and some other stuff I use regularly on most projects. Now having split my typical garbled spaghetti bowl mess of code into somewhat organized files, I've come into some problems when it comes to making sure files are all included when they need to be, and how to logically divide the scripts up into classes, aswell as how segmented I should be making each class. I guess I have rambled on enough about much of nothing, but what I am really asking for is advise from people, or suggested reading that focuses not on specific functions and formats of code, but the logical layout of projects that are larger than just a hobby project. I want to learn how to do things proper, and while I am still learning in some areas, this is something that I have no clue about other than just being creative, and trial/error. Mostly error. Thanks for any replies. This place is great.

    Read the article

  • What is a good software development plan?

    - by Totophil
    Whilst browsing through answers on SO I came across something that is, in my view, one of the more frequent software development management misconceptions: "[software development] plan is a reasonably detailed description of all the activities you need to undertake". Hence the question: what is good software development plan? Can it be boiled down just to a work breakdown structure; is WBS the single most important thing for a software development plan anyway?

    Read the article

  • Authoritative sources about Database vs. Flatfile decision

    - by FastAl
    <tldr>looking for a reference to a book or other undeniably authoritative source that gives reasons when you should choose a database vs. when you should choose other storage methods. I have provided an un-authoritative list of reasons about 2/3 of the way down this post.</tldr> I have a situation at my company where a database is being used where it would be better to use another solution (in this case, an auto-generated piece of source code that contains a static lookup table, searched by binary sort). Normally, a database would be an OK solution even though the problem does not require a database, e.g, none of the elements of ACID are needed, as it is read-only data, updated about every 3-5 years (also requiring other sourcecode changes), and fits in memory, and can be keyed into via binary search (a tad faster than db, but speed is not an issue). The problem is that this code runs on our enterprise server, but is shared with several PC platforms (some disconnected, some use a central DB, etc.), and parts of it are managed by multiple programming units, parts by the DBAs, parts even by mathematicians in another department, etc. These hit their own platform’s version of their databases (containing their own copy of the static data). What happens is that every implementation, every little change, something different goes wrong. There are many other issues as well. I can’t even use a flatfile, because one mode of running on our enterprise server does not have permission to read files (only databases, and of course, its own literal storage, e.g., in-source table). Of course, other parts of the system use databases in proper, less obscure manners; there is no problem with those parts. So why don’t we just change it? I don’t have administrative ability to force a change. But I’m affected because sometimes I have to help fix the problems, but mostly because it causes outages and tons of extra IT time by other programmers and d*mmit that makes me mad! The reason neither management, nor the designers of the system, can see the problem is that they propose a solution that won’t work: increase communication; implement more safeguards and standards; etc. But every time, in a different part of the already-pared-down but still multi-step processes, a few different diligent, hard-working, top performing IT personnel make a unique subtle error that causes it to fail, sometimes after the last round of testing! And in general these are not single-person failures, but understandable miscommunications. And communication at our company is actually better than most. People just don't think that's the case because they haven't dug into the matter. However, I have it on very good word from somebody with extensive formal study of sociology and psychology that the relatively small amount of less-than-proper database usage in this gigantic cross-platform multi-source, multi-language project is bureaucratically un-maintainable. Impossible. No chance. At least with Human Beings in the loop, and it can’t be automated. In addition, the management and developers who could change this, though intelligent and capable, don’t understand the rigidity of this ‘how humans are’ issue, and are not convincible on the matter. The reason putting the static data in sourcecode will solve the problem is, although the solution is less sexy than a database, it would function with no technical drawbacks; and since the sharing of sourcecode already works very well, you basically erase any database-related effort from this section of the project, along with all the drawbacks of it that are causing problems. OK, that’s the background, for the curious. I won’t be able to convince management that this is an unfixable sociological problem, and that the real solution is coding around these limits of human nature, just as you would code around a bug in a 3rd party component that you can’t change. So what I have to do is exploit the unsuitableness of the database solution, and not do it using logic, but rather authority. I am aware of many reasons, and posts on this site giving reasons for one over the other; I’m not looking for lists of reasons like these (although you can add a comment if I've miss a doozy): WHY USE A DATABASE? instead of flatfile/other DB vs. file: if you need... Random Read / Transparent search optimization Advanced / varied / customizable Searching and sorting capabilities Transaction/rollback Locks, semaphores Concurrency control / Shared users Security 1-many/m-m is easier Easy modification Scalability Load Balancing Random updates / inserts / deletes Advanced query Administrative control of design, etc. SQL / learning curve Debugging / Logging Centralized / Live Backup capabilities Cached queries / dvlp & cache execution plans Interleaved update/read Referential integrity, avoid redundant/missing/corrupt/out-of-sync data Reporting (from on olap or oltp db) / turnkey generation tools [Disadvantages:] Important to get right the first time - professional design - but only b/c it's meant to last s/w & h/w cost Usu. over a network, speed issue (best vs. best design vs. local=even then a separate process req's marshalling/netwk layers/inter-p comm) indicies and query processing can stand in the way of simple processing (vs. flatfile) WHY USE FLATFILE: If you only need... Sequential Row processing only Limited usage append only (no reading, no master key/update) Only Update the record you're reading (fixed length recs only) Too big to fit into memory If Local disk / read-ahead network connection Portability / small system Email / cut & Paste / store as document by novice - simple format Low design learning curve but high cost later WHY USE IN-MEMORY/TABLE (tables, arrays, etc.): if you need... Processing a single db/ff record that was imported Known size of data Static data if hardcoding the table Narrow, unchanging use (e.g., one program or proc) -includes a class that will be shared, but encapsulates its data manipulation Extreme speed needed / high transaction frequency Random access - but search is dependent on implementation Following are some other posts about the topic: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1499239/database-vs-flat-text-file-what-are-some-technical-reasons-for-choosing-one-over http://stackoverflow.com/questions/332825/are-flat-file-databases-any-good http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2356851/database-vs-flat-files http://stackoverflow.com/questions/514455/databases-vs-plain-text/514530 What I’d like to know is if anybody could recommend a hard, authoritative source containing these reasons. I’m looking for a paper book I can buy, or a reputable website with whitepapers about the issue (e.g., Microsoft, IBM), not counting the user-generated content on those sites. This will have a greater change to elicit a change that I’m looking for: less wasted programmer time, and more reliable programs. Thanks very much for your help. You win a prize for reading such a large post!

    Read the article

  • Does the 80/20 rule of time management apply to developers?

    - by Dean
    Jeff's recent article linked to a time management example of the First Fit Decreasing algorithm, which talked about the Pareto principle (or, the 80/20 rule) of time management, that is, that 80% of the work we produce in 20% of our time. Now we've all heard the programmer quote: The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time. The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development time. But all jokes aside, it is often as if 20% of your code is to do what you want, and the other 80% is to handle exceptions... so does the 80/20 rule really apply to developers? Does anyone have any examples of why it does / does not apply to us?

    Read the article

  • Functional Specifications vs. Requirements Document

    - by KP
    Guys, Currently in my comp., there are some changes going on regarding project documentation. There is a LOT of time and effort spent on discussing functional specs vs. requirements doc. However, I don't think anyone here understands the reason why you would use one over the other. Therefore, I don't understand the difference myself. Can someone shed some light on this matter plz? If you have links to articles, blog posts, etc. that would be helpful too. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to plan for whitebox testing

    - by Draco
    I'm relatively new to the world of WhiteBox Testing and need help designing a test plan for 1 of the projects that i'm currently working on. At the moment i'm just scouting around looking for testable pieces of code and then writing some unit tests for that. I somehow feel that is by far not the way it should be done. Please could you give me advice as to how best prepare myself for testing this project? Any tools or test plan templates that I could use? THe language being used is C++ if it'll make difference.

    Read the article

  • How do I prove I should put a table of values in source code instead of a database table?

    - by FastAl
    <tldr>looking for a reference to a book or other undeniably authoritative source that gives reasons when you should choose a database vs. when you should choose other storage methods. I have provided an un-authoritative list of reasons about 2/3 of the way down this post.</tldr> I have a situation at my company where a database is being used where it would be better to use another solution (in this case, an auto-generated piece of source code that contains a static lookup table, searched by binary sort). Normally, a database would be an OK solution even though the problem does not require a database, e.g, none of the elements of ACID are needed, as it is read-only data, updated about every 3-5 years (also requiring other sourcecode changes), and fits in memory, and can be keyed into via binary search (a tad faster than db, but speed is not an issue). The problem is that this code runs on our enterprise server, but is shared with several PC platforms (some disconnected, some use a central DB, etc.), and parts of it are managed by multiple programming units, parts by the DBAs, parts even by mathematicians in another department, etc. These hit their own platform’s version of their databases (containing their own copy of the static data). What happens is that every implementation, every little change, something different goes wrong. There are many other issues as well. I can’t even use a flatfile, because one mode of running on our enterprise server does not have permission to read files (only databases, and of course, its own literal storage, e.g., in-source table). Of course, other parts of the system use databases in proper, less obscure manners; there is no problem with those parts. So why don’t we just change it? I don’t have administrative ability to force a change. But I’m affected because sometimes I have to help fix the problems, but mostly because it causes outages and tons of extra IT time by other programmers and d*mmit that makes me mad! The reason neither management, nor the designers of the system, can see the problem is that they propose a solution that won’t work: increase communication; implement more safeguards and standards; etc. But every time, in a different part of the already-pared-down but still multi-step processes, a few different diligent, hard-working, top performing IT personnel make a unique subtle error that causes it to fail, sometimes after the last round of testing! And in general these are not single-person failures, but understandable miscommunications. And communication at our company is actually better than most. People just don't think that's the case because they haven't dug into the matter. However, I have it on very good word from somebody with extensive formal study of sociology and psychology that the relatively small amount of less-than-proper database usage in this gigantic cross-platform multi-source, multi-language project is bureaucratically un-maintainable. Impossible. No chance. At least with Human Beings in the loop, and it can’t be automated. In addition, the management and developers who could change this, though intelligent and capable, don’t understand the rigidity of this ‘how humans are’ issue, and are not convincible on the matter. The reason putting the static data in sourcecode will solve the problem is, although the solution is less sexy than a database, it would function with no technical drawbacks; and since the sharing of sourcecode already works very well, you basically erase any database-related effort from this section of the project, along with all the drawbacks of it that are causing problems. OK, that’s the background, for the curious. I won’t be able to convince management that this is an unfixable sociological problem, and that the real solution is coding around these limits of human nature, just as you would code around a bug in a 3rd party component that you can’t change. So what I have to do is exploit the unsuitableness of the database solution, and not do it using logic, but rather authority. I am aware of many reasons, and posts on this site giving reasons for one over the other; I’m not looking for lists of reasons like these (although you can add a comment if I've miss a doozy): WHY USE A DATABASE? instead of flatfile/other DB vs. file: if you need... Random Read / Transparent search optimization Advanced / varied / customizable Searching and sorting capabilities Transaction/rollback Locks, semaphores Concurrency control / Shared users Security 1-many/m-m is easier Easy modification Scalability Load Balancing Random updates / inserts / deletes Advanced query Administrative control of design, etc. SQL / learning curve Debugging / Logging Centralized / Live Backup capabilities Cached queries / dvlp & cache execution plans Interleaved update/read Referential integrity, avoid redundant/missing/corrupt/out-of-sync data Reporting (from on olap or oltp db) / turnkey generation tools [Disadvantages:] Important to get right the first time - professional design - but only b/c it's meant to last s/w & h/w cost Usu. over a network, speed issue (best vs. best design vs. local=even then a separate process req's marshalling/netwk layers/inter-p comm) indicies and query processing can stand in the way of simple processing (vs. flatfile) WHY USE FLATFILE: If you only need... Sequential Row processing only Limited usage append only (no reading, no master key/update) Only Update the record you're reading (fixed length recs only) Too big to fit into memory If Local disk / read-ahead network connection Portability / small system Email / cut & Paste / store as document by novice - simple format Low design learning curve but high cost later WHY USE IN-MEMORY/TABLE (tables, arrays, etc.): if you need... Processing a single db/ff record that was imported Known size of data Static data if hardcoding the table Narrow, unchanging use (e.g., one program or proc) -includes a class that will be shared, but encapsulates its data manipulation Extreme speed needed / high transaction frequency Random access - but search is dependent on implementation Following are some other posts about the topic: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1499239/database-vs-flat-text-file-what-are-some-technical-reasons-for-choosing-one-over http://stackoverflow.com/questions/332825/are-flat-file-databases-any-good http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2356851/database-vs-flat-files http://stackoverflow.com/questions/514455/databases-vs-plain-text/514530 What I’d like to know is if anybody could recommend a hard, authoritative source containing these reasons. I’m looking for a paper book I can buy, or a reputable website with whitepapers about the issue (e.g., Microsoft, IBM), not counting the user-generated content on those sites. This will have a greater change to elicit a change that I’m looking for: less wasted programmer time, and more reliable programs. Thanks very much for your help. You win a prize for reading such a large post!

    Read the article

  • Maximum number of files one ext3 directory while still getting acceptable performance?

    - by knorv
    I have an application writing to an ext3 directory which over time has grown to roughly three million files. Needless to say, reading the file listing of this directory is unbearably slow. I don't blame ext3. The proper solution would have been to let the directory write to sub-directories such as ./a/b/c/abc.ext rather than just ./abc.ext. I'm changing to such a sub-directory structure and my question is simply: roughly how many files should I expect to store in one ext3 directory while still getting acceptable performance? Or in other words; assuming that I need to store three million files in the structure, how many levels deep should the ./a/b/c/abc.ext structure be? Obviously this is a question that cannot be answered exactly, but I'm looking for a ball park estimate.

    Read the article

  • how can I design a good architechture for a Transaction Processing System?

    - by ghedas
    I have a project that must design an architecture for it. This project is a something like a Transaction Processing system and I need to know something like this: when and where I must use synchronous and asynchronous relations between its components? If always I use synchronous relations, the amount of messages maybe become exceeded and makes problem for TP system, and on the other hand synchronous relations make lots of delay, I think a mixture of them is required! If other parameters required to considering please help me! the most nonfunctional requirements of this project are performance and availability of it. I need useful materials and suggestions for it.

    Read the article

  • Managing my TODO list - how to get organised

    - by sparkes
    What's the best way to organise my personal TODO list? and what tools are available for organising team TODO lists? Should I still be thinking in terms of TODO or are there better ways to manage my time and projects? See also this question on Organization which is similar

    Read the article

  • Speccing out new features

    - by christopher-mccann
    I am curious as to how other development teams spec out new features. The team I have just moved up to lead has no real specification process. I have just implemented a proper development process with CI, auto deployment and logging all bugs using Trac and I am now moving on to deal with changes. I have a list of about 20 changes to our product to have done over the next 2 months. Normally I would just spec out each change going into detail of what should be done but I am curious as to how other teams handle this. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • When is a good time to start thinking about scaling?

    - by Slokun
    I've been designing a site over the past couple days, and been doing some research into different aspects of scaling a site horizontally. If things go as planned, in a few months (years?) I know I'd need to worry about scaling the site up and out, since the resources it would end up consuming would be huge. So, this got me to thinking, when is the best time to start thinking about, and designing for, scalability? If you start too early on, you could easily over complicate your design, and make it impossible to actually build. You could also get too caught up in the details, the architecture, whatever, and wind up getting nothing done. Also, if you do get it working, but the site never takes off, you may have wasted a good chunk of extra effort. On the other hand, you could be saving yourself a ton of effort down the road. Designing it from the ground up to be big would make it much easier later on to let it grow big, with very little rewriting going on. I know for what I'm working on, I've decided to make at least a few choices now on the side of scaling, but I'm not going to do a complete change of thinking to get it to scale completely. Notably, I've redesigned my database from a conventional relational design to one similar to what was suggested on the Reddit site linked below, and I'm going to give memcache a try. So, the basic question, when is a good time to start thinking or worrying about scaling, and what are some good designs, tips, etc. for when doing so? A couple of things I've been reading, for those who are interested: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2009/06/scaling-up-vs-scaling-out-hidden-costs.html http://highscalability.com/blog/2010/5/17/7-lessons-learned-while-building-reddit-to-270-million-page.html http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html

    Read the article

  • How to apply or chain multiple matching templates in XSLT?

    - by Ignatius
    I am working on a stylesheet employing many templates with match attributes: <xsl:template match="//one" priority="0.7"> <xsl:param name="input" select="."/> <xsl:value-of select="util:uppercase($input)"/> <xsl:next-match /> </xsl:template> <xsl:template match="/stuff/one"> <xsl:param name="input" select="."/> <xsl:value-of select="util:add-period($input)"/> </xsl:template> <xsl:function name="util:uppercase"> <xsl:param name="input"/> <xsl:value-of select="upper-case($input)"/> </xsl:function> <xsl:function name="util:add-period"> <xsl:param name="input"/> <xsl:value-of select="concat($input,'.')"/> </xsl:function> What I would like to do is be able to 'chain' the two functions above, so that an input of 'string' would be rendered in the output as 'STRING.' (with the period.) I would like to do this in such a way that doesn't require knowledge of other templates in any other template. So, for instance, I would like to be able to add a "util:add-colon" method without having to open up the hood and monkey with the existing templates. I was playing around with the <xsl:next-match/> instruction to accomplish this. Adding it to the first template above does of course invoke both util:uppercase and util:add-period, but the output is an aggregation of each template output (i.e. 'STRINGstring.') It seems like there should be an elegant way to chain any number of templates together using something like <xsl:next-match/>, but have the output of each template feed the input of the next one in the chain. Am I overlooking something obvious?

    Read the article

  • How do you go from an abstract project description to actual code?

    - by Jason
    Maybe its because I've been coding around two semesters now, but the major stumbling block that I'm having at this point is converting the professor's project description and requirements to actual code. Since I'm currently in Algorithms 101, I basically do a bottom-up process, starting with a blank whiteboard and draw out the object and method interactions, then translate that into classes and code. But now the prof has tossed interfaces and abstract classes into the mix. Intellectually, I can recognize how they work, but am stubbing my toes figuring out how to use these new tools with the current project (simulating a web server). In my professors own words, mapping the abstract description to Java code is the real trick. So what steps are best used to go from English (or whatever your language is) to computer code? How do you decide where and when to create an interface, or use an abstract class?

    Read the article

  • Best way to keep a large number of hobby projects alive; open sourcing?

    - by Daan van Yperen
    Because my time is limited I can usually only focus on one or two of my hobby projects, while the others sit there wasting away. I am looking for a solution that would allow me to divide my time better. is open sourcing where I take the role of guiding the project realistic, or are there better solutions? In my case, one project has a reasonably sized community of users going for it but is currently closed source. There have been requests to open source it.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >