Search Results

Search found 6101 results on 245 pages for 'incremental backup'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 29/245 | < Previous Page | 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36  | Next Page >

  • Automating the Backup of a SQL Server 2008 Express Database

    - by JaydPage
    Steps Involved: 1) Create a Database Backup Script. 2) Create a Scheduled Task To Run the Backup Script. 1 Create a Database Backup Script. a) Download and install SQL Server Management Studio. This is a free tool available on the Microsoft website. b) Once Management Studio is installed launch it and connect to the SQL server instance that contains the database that you want to back up. c) Right click on the database and then in the menu choose Tasks -> Back up... d) This will open up a window where you can choose your backup options, once you are happy with the options click on the "Script" button near the top and select the "Script Action to File" option. e) Save the File. 2 Create a Schedule Task to Run the Backup Script a) Open up Windows Task Scheduler. b) Create a new Task using the wizard, when asked to select a program browse to C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\100\Tools\binn\SQLCMD.exe c) There are 2 arguments that need to be set: -S \SERVER_INSTANCE_NAME  -i "PATH_OF_SQLBACKUP_SCRIPT" where SERVER_INSTANCE_NAME  is the name of the instance of SQL server that contains your database e.g. (local) and PATH_OF_SQLBACKUP_SCRIPT is the path of your backup script e.g. "C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\DatastoreBackup.sql" d) Adjust the task to run at the desired times and you are done.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Fastest Way to Restore the Database

    - by pinaldave
    A few days ago, I received following email: “Pinal, We are in an emergency situation. We have a large database of around 80+ GB and its backup is of 50+ GB in size. We need to restore this database ASAP and use it; however, restoring the database takes forever. Do you think a compressed backup would solve our problem? Any other ideas you got?” First of all, the asker has already answered his own question. Yes; I have seen that if you are using a compressed backup, it takes lesser time when you try to restore a database. I have previously blogged about the same subject. Here are the links to those blog posts: SQL SERVER – Data and Page Compressions – Data Storage and IO Improvement SQL SERVER – 2008 – Introduction to Row Compression SQL SERVER – 2008 – Introduction to New Feature of Backup Compression However, if your database is very large that it still takes a few minutes to restore the database even though you use any of the features listed above, then it will really take some time to restore the database. If there is urgency and there is no time you can spare for restoring the database, then you can use the wonderful tool developed by Idera called virtual database. This tool restores a certain database in just a few seconds so it will readily be available for usage. I have in depth written my experience with this tool in the article here SQL SERVER – Retrieve and Explore Database Backup without Restoring Database – Idera virtual database. Let me know your experience in this scenario. Have you ever needed your database backup restored very quickly, what did you do in that scenario. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, Readers Question, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Backup and Restore, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • wbadmin incremental system state backup

    - by user74513
    I am doing system state backups on a Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise (Service Pack 1) machine and expected the backups after the first one to be incremental. However with each backup a new directory with vhd files are created and the vhd files are almost the same size as the with the first backup. So the backups does not seem to be incremental. I used the following command to do the backup: wbadmin start systemstatebackup -backupTarget:f: I played around with the settings under "Configure Performance Settings" in the Windows Server Backup plugin in Server Manager but according to the description at the top of the dialog these settings are not applied to system state backups. Are there any settings available for wbadmin system state backup to make the backups incremental?

    Read the article

  • wbadmin incremental system state backup

    - by user74513
    I am doing system state backups on a Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise (Service Pack 1) machine and expected the backups after the first one to be incremental. However with each backup a new directory with vhd files are created and the vhd files are almost the same size as the with the first backup. So the backups does not seem to be incremental. I used the following command to do the backup: wbadmin start systemstatebackup -backupTarget:f: I played around with the settings under "Configure Performance Settings" in the Windows Server Backup plugin in Server Manager but according to the description at the top of the dialog these settings are not applied to system state backups. Are there any settings available for wbadmin system state backup to make the backups incremental?

    Read the article

  • The Incremental Architect&rsquo;s Napkin - #5 - Design functions for extensibility and readability

    - by Ralf Westphal
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/theArchitectsNapkin/archive/2014/08/24/the-incremental-architectrsquos-napkin---5---design-functions-for.aspx The functionality of programs is entered via Entry Points. So what we´re talking about when designing software is a bunch of functions handling the requests represented by and flowing in through those Entry Points. Designing software thus consists of at least three phases: Analyzing the requirements to find the Entry Points and their signatures Designing the functionality to be executed when those Entry Points get triggered Implementing the functionality according to the design aka coding I presume, you´re familiar with phase 1 in some way. And I guess you´re proficient in implementing functionality in some programming language. But in my experience developers in general are not experienced in going through an explicit phase 2. “Designing functionality? What´s that supposed to mean?” you might already have thought. Here´s my definition: To design functionality (or functional design for short) means thinking about… well, functions. You find a solution for what´s supposed to happen when an Entry Point gets triggered in terms of functions. A conceptual solution that is, because those functions only exist in your head (or on paper) during this phase. But you may have guess that, because it´s “design” not “coding”. And here is, what functional design is not: It´s not about logic. Logic is expressions (e.g. +, -, && etc.) and control statements (e.g. if, switch, for, while etc.). Also I consider calling external APIs as logic. It´s equally basic. It´s what code needs to do in order to deliver some functionality or quality. Logic is what´s doing that needs to be done by software. Transformations are either done through expressions or API-calls. And then there is alternative control flow depending on the result of some expression. Basically it´s just jumps in Assembler, sometimes to go forward (if, switch), sometimes to go backward (for, while, do). But calling your own function is not logic. It´s not necessary to produce any outcome. Functionality is not enhanced by adding functions (subroutine calls) to your code. Nor is quality increased by adding functions. No performance gain, no higher scalability etc. through functions. Functions are not relevant to functionality. Strange, isn´t it. What they are important for is security of investment. By introducing functions into our code we can become more productive (re-use) and can increase evolvability (higher unterstandability, easier to keep code consistent). That´s no small feat, however. Evolvable code can hardly be overestimated. That´s why to me functional design is so important. It´s at the core of software development. To sum this up: Functional design is on a level of abstraction above (!) logical design or algorithmic design. Functional design is only done until you get to a point where each function is so simple you are very confident you can easily code it. Functional design an logical design (which mostly is coding, but can also be done using pseudo code or flow charts) are complementary. Software needs both. If you start coding right away you end up in a tangled mess very quickly. Then you need back out through refactoring. Functional design on the other hand is bloodless without actual code. It´s just a theory with no experiments to prove it. But how to do functional design? An example of functional design Let´s assume a program to de-duplicate strings. The user enters a number of strings separated by commas, e.g. a, b, a, c, d, b, e, c, a. And the program is supposed to clear this list of all doubles, e.g. a, b, c, d, e. There is only one Entry Point to this program: the user triggers the de-duplication by starting the program with the string list on the command line C:\>deduplicate "a, b, a, c, d, b, e, c, a" a, b, c, d, e …or by clicking on a GUI button. This leads to the Entry Point function to get called. It´s the program´s main function in case of the batch version or a button click event handler in the GUI version. That´s the physical Entry Point so to speak. It´s inevitable. What then happens is a three step process: Transform the input data from the user into a request. Call the request handler. Transform the output of the request handler into a tangible result for the user. Or to phrase it a bit more generally: Accept input. Transform input into output. Present output. This does not mean any of these steps requires a lot of effort. Maybe it´s just one line of code to accomplish it. Nevertheless it´s a distinct step in doing the processing behind an Entry Point. Call it an aspect or a responsibility - and you will realize it most likely deserves a function of its own to satisfy the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP). Interestingly the above list of steps is already functional design. There is no logic, but nevertheless the solution is described - albeit on a higher level of abstraction than you might have done yourself. But it´s still on a meta-level. The application to the domain at hand is easy, though: Accept string list from command line De-duplicate Present de-duplicated strings on standard output And this concrete list of processing steps can easily be transformed into code:static void Main(string[] args) { var input = Accept_string_list(args); var output = Deduplicate(input); Present_deduplicated_string_list(output); } Instead of a big problem there are three much smaller problems now. If you think each of those is trivial to implement, then go for it. You can stop the functional design at this point. But maybe, just maybe, you´re not so sure how to go about with the de-duplication for example. Then just implement what´s easy right now, e.g.private static string Accept_string_list(string[] args) { return args[0]; } private static void Present_deduplicated_string_list( string[] output) { var line = string.Join(", ", output); Console.WriteLine(line); } Accept_string_list() contains logic in the form of an API-call. Present_deduplicated_string_list() contains logic in the form of an expression and an API-call. And then repeat the functional design for the remaining processing step. What´s left is the domain logic: de-duplicating a list of strings. How should that be done? Without any logic at our disposal during functional design you´re left with just functions. So which functions could make up the de-duplication? Here´s a suggestion: De-duplicate Parse the input string into a true list of strings. Register each string in a dictionary/map/set. That way duplicates get cast away. Transform the data structure into a list of unique strings. Processing step 2 obviously was the core of the solution. That´s where real creativity was needed. That´s the core of the domain. But now after this refinement the implementation of each step is easy again:private static string[] Parse_string_list(string input) { return input.Split(',') .Select(s => s.Trim()) .ToArray(); } private static Dictionary<string,object> Compile_unique_strings(string[] strings) { return strings.Aggregate( new Dictionary<string, object>(), (agg, s) => { agg[s] = null; return agg; }); } private static string[] Serialize_unique_strings( Dictionary<string,object> dict) { return dict.Keys.ToArray(); } With these three additional functions Main() now looks like this:static void Main(string[] args) { var input = Accept_string_list(args); var strings = Parse_string_list(input); var dict = Compile_unique_strings(strings); var output = Serialize_unique_strings(dict); Present_deduplicated_string_list(output); } I think that´s very understandable code: just read it from top to bottom and you know how the solution to the problem works. It´s a mirror image of the initial design: Accept string list from command line Parse the input string into a true list of strings. Register each string in a dictionary/map/set. That way duplicates get cast away. Transform the data structure into a list of unique strings. Present de-duplicated strings on standard output You can even re-generate the design by just looking at the code. Code and functional design thus are always in sync - if you follow some simple rules. But about that later. And as a bonus: all the functions making up the process are small - which means easy to understand, too. So much for an initial concrete example. Now it´s time for some theory. Because there is method to this madness ;-) The above has only scratched the surface. Introducing Flow Design Functional design starts with a given function, the Entry Point. Its goal is to describe the behavior of the program when the Entry Point is triggered using a process, not an algorithm. An algorithm consists of logic, a process on the other hand consists just of steps or stages. Each processing step transforms input into output or a side effect. Also it might access resources, e.g. a printer, a database, or just memory. Processing steps thus can rely on state of some sort. This is different from Functional Programming, where functions are supposed to not be stateful and not cause side effects.[1] In its simplest form a process can be written as a bullet point list of steps, e.g. Get data from user Output result to user Transform data Parse data Map result for output Such a compilation of steps - possibly on different levels of abstraction - often is the first artifact of functional design. It can be generated by a team in an initial design brainstorming. Next comes ordering the steps. What should happen first, what next etc.? Get data from user Parse data Transform data Map result for output Output result to user That´s great for a start into functional design. It´s better than starting to code right away on a given function using TDD. Please get me right: TDD is a valuable practice. But it can be unnecessarily hard if the scope of a functionn is too large. But how do you know beforehand without investing some thinking? And how to do this thinking in a systematic fashion? My recommendation: For any given function you´re supposed to implement first do a functional design. Then, once you´re confident you know the processing steps - which are pretty small - refine and code them using TDD. You´ll see that´s much, much easier - and leads to cleaner code right away. For more information on this approach I call “Informed TDD” read my book of the same title. Thinking before coding is smart. And writing down the solution as a bunch of functions possibly is the simplest thing you can do, I´d say. It´s more according to the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) principle than returning constants or other trivial stuff TDD development often is started with. So far so good. A simple ordered list of processing steps will do to start with functional design. As shown in the above example such steps can easily be translated into functions. Moving from design to coding thus is simple. However, such a list does not scale. Processing is not always that simple to be captured in a list. And then the list is just text. Again. Like code. That means the design is lacking visuality. Textual representations need more parsing by your brain than visual representations. Plus they are limited in their “dimensionality”: text just has one dimension, it´s sequential. Alternatives and parallelism are hard to encode in text. In addition the functional design using numbered lists lacks data. It´s not visible what´s the input, output, and state of the processing steps. That´s why functional design should be done using a lightweight visual notation. No tool is necessary to draw such designs. Use pen and paper; a flipchart, a whiteboard, or even a napkin is sufficient. Visualizing processes The building block of the functional design notation is a functional unit. I mostly draw it like this: Something is done, it´s clear what goes in, it´s clear what comes out, and it´s clear what the processing step requires in terms of state or hardware. Whenever input flows into a functional unit it gets processed and output is produced and/or a side effect occurs. Flowing data is the driver of something happening. That´s why I call this approach to functional design Flow Design. It´s about data flow instead of control flow. Control flow like in algorithms is of no concern to functional design. Thinking about control flow simply is too low level. Once you start with control flow you easily get bogged down by tons of details. That´s what you want to avoid during design. Design is supposed to be quick, broad brush, abstract. It should give overview. But what about all the details? As Robert C. Martin rightly said: “Programming is abot detail”. Detail is a matter of code. Once you start coding the processing steps you designed you can worry about all the detail you want. Functional design does not eliminate all the nitty gritty. It just postpones tackling them. To me that´s also an example of the SRP. Function design has the responsibility to come up with a solution to a problem posed by a single function (Entry Point). And later coding has the responsibility to implement the solution down to the last detail (i.e. statement, API-call). TDD unfortunately mixes both responsibilities. It´s just coding - and thereby trying to find detailed implementations (green phase) plus getting the design right (refactoring). To me that´s one reason why TDD has failed to deliver on its promise for many developers. Using functional units as building blocks of functional design processes can be depicted very easily. Here´s the initial process for the example problem: For each processing step draw a functional unit and label it. Choose a verb or an “action phrase” as a label, not a noun. Functional design is about activities, not state or structure. Then make the output of an upstream step the input of a downstream step. Finally think about the data that should flow between the functional units. Write the data above the arrows connecting the functional units in the direction of the data flow. Enclose the data description in brackets. That way you can clearly see if all flows have already been specified. Empty brackets mean “no data is flowing”, but nevertheless a signal is sent. A name like “list” or “strings” in brackets describes the data content. Use lower case labels for that purpose. A name starting with an upper case letter like “String” or “Customer” on the other hand signifies a data type. If you like, you also can combine descriptions with data types by separating them with a colon, e.g. (list:string) or (strings:string[]). But these are just suggestions from my practice with Flow Design. You can do it differently, if you like. Just be sure to be consistent. Flows wired-up in this manner I call one-dimensional (1D). Each functional unit just has one input and/or one output. A functional unit without an output is possible. It´s like a black hole sucking up input without producing any output. Instead it produces side effects. A functional unit without an input, though, does make much sense. When should it start to work? What´s the trigger? That´s why in the above process even the first processing step has an input. If you like, view such 1D-flows as pipelines. Data is flowing through them from left to right. But as you can see, it´s not always the same data. It get´s transformed along its passage: (args) becomes a (list) which is turned into (strings). The Principle of Mutual Oblivion A very characteristic trait of flows put together from function units is: no functional units knows another one. They are all completely independent of each other. Functional units don´t know where their input is coming from (or even when it´s gonna arrive). They just specify a range of values they can process. And they promise a certain behavior upon input arriving. Also they don´t know where their output is going. They just produce it in their own time independent of other functional units. That means at least conceptually all functional units work in parallel. Functional units don´t know their “deployment context”. They now nothing about the overall flow they are place in. They are just consuming input from some upstream, and producing output for some downstream. That makes functional units very easy to test. At least as long as they don´t depend on state or resources. I call this the Principle of Mutual Oblivion (PoMO). Functional units are oblivious of others as well as an overall context/purpose. They are just parts of a whole focused on a single responsibility. How the whole is built, how a larger goal is achieved, is of no concern to the single functional units. By building software in such a manner, functional design interestingly follows nature. Nature´s building blocks for organisms also follow the PoMO. The cells forming your body do not know each other. Take a nerve cell “controlling” a muscle cell for example:[2] The nerve cell does not know anything about muscle cells, let alone the specific muscel cell it is “attached to”. Likewise the muscle cell does not know anything about nerve cells, let a lone a specific nerve cell “attached to” it. Saying “the nerve cell is controlling the muscle cell” thus only makes sense when viewing both from the outside. “Control” is a concept of the whole, not of its parts. Control is created by wiring-up parts in a certain way. Both cells are mutually oblivious. Both just follow a contract. One produces Acetylcholine (ACh) as output, the other consumes ACh as input. Where the ACh is going, where it´s coming from neither cell cares about. Million years of evolution have led to this kind of division of labor. And million years of evolution have produced organism designs (DNA) which lead to the production of these different cell types (and many others) and also to their co-location. The result: the overall behavior of an organism. How and why this happened in nature is a mystery. For our software, though, it´s clear: functional and quality requirements needs to be fulfilled. So we as developers have to become “intelligent designers” of “software cells” which we put together to form a “software organism” which responds in satisfying ways to triggers from it´s environment. My bet is: If nature gets complex organisms working by following the PoMO, who are we to not apply this recipe for success to our much simpler “machines”? So my rule is: Wherever there is functionality to be delivered, because there is a clear Entry Point into software, design the functionality like nature would do it. Build it from mutually oblivious functional units. That´s what Flow Design is about. In that way it´s even universal, I´d say. Its notation can also be applied to biology: Never mind labeling the functional units with nouns. That´s ok in Flow Design. You´ll do that occassionally for functional units on a higher level of abstraction or when their purpose is close to hardware. Getting a cockroach to roam your bedroom takes 1,000,000 nerve cells (neurons). Getting the de-duplication program to do its job just takes 5 “software cells” (functional units). Both, though, follow the same basic principle. Translating functional units into code Moving from functional design to code is no rocket science. In fact it´s straightforward. There are two simple rules: Translate an input port to a function. Translate an output port either to a return statement in that function or to a function pointer visible to that function. The simplest translation of a functional unit is a function. That´s what you saw in the above example. Functions are mutually oblivious. That why Functional Programming likes them so much. It makes them composable. Which is the reason, nature works according to the PoMO. Let´s be clear about one thing: There is no dependency injection in nature. For all of an organism´s complexity no DI container is used. Behavior is the result of smooth cooperation between mutually oblivious building blocks. Functions will often be the adequate translation for the functional units in your designs. But not always. Take for example the case, where a processing step should not always produce an output. Maybe the purpose is to filter input. Here the functional unit consumes words and produces words. But it does not pass along every word flowing in. Some words are swallowed. Think of a spell checker. It probably should not check acronyms for correctness. There are too many of them. Or words with no more than two letters. Such words are called “stop words”. In the above picture the optionality of the output is signified by the astrisk outside the brackets. It means: Any number of (word) data items can flow from the functional unit for each input data item. It might be none or one or even more. This I call a stream of data. Such behavior cannot be translated into a function where output is generated with return. Because a function always needs to return a value. So the output port is translated into a function pointer or continuation which gets passed to the subroutine when called:[3]void filter_stop_words( string word, Action<string> onNoStopWord) { if (...check if not a stop word...) onNoStopWord(word); } If you want to be nitpicky you might call such a function pointer parameter an injection. And technically you´re right. Conceptually, though, it´s not an injection. Because the subroutine is not functionally dependent on the continuation. Firstly continuations are procedures, i.e. subroutines without a return type. Remember: Flow Design is about unidirectional data flow. Secondly the name of the formal parameter is chosen in a way as to not assume anything about downstream processing steps. onNoStopWord describes a situation (or event) within the functional unit only. Translating output ports into function pointers helps keeping functional units mutually oblivious in cases where output is optional or produced asynchronically. Either pass the function pointer to the function upon call. Or make it global by putting it on the encompassing class. Then it´s called an event. In C# that´s even an explicit feature.class Filter { public void filter_stop_words( string word) { if (...check if not a stop word...) onNoStopWord(word); } public event Action<string> onNoStopWord; } When to use a continuation and when to use an event dependens on how a functional unit is used in flows and how it´s packed together with others into classes. You´ll see examples further down the Flow Design road. Another example of 1D functional design Let´s see Flow Design once more in action using the visual notation. How about the famous word wrap kata? Robert C. Martin has posted a much cited solution including an extensive reasoning behind his TDD approach. So maybe you want to compare it to Flow Design. The function signature given is:string WordWrap(string text, int maxLineLength) {...} That´s not an Entry Point since we don´t see an application with an environment and users. Nevertheless it´s a function which is supposed to provide a certain functionality. The text passed in has to be reformatted. The input is a single line of arbitrary length consisting of words separated by spaces. The output should consist of one or more lines of a maximum length specified. If a word is longer than a the maximum line length it can be split in multiple parts each fitting in a line. Flow Design Let´s start by brainstorming the process to accomplish the feat of reformatting the text. What´s needed? Words need to be assembled into lines Words need to be extracted from the input text The resulting lines need to be assembled into the output text Words too long to fit in a line need to be split Does sound about right? I guess so. And it shows a kind of priority. Long words are a special case. So maybe there is a hint for an incremental design here. First let´s tackle “average words” (words not longer than a line). Here´s the Flow Design for this increment: The the first three bullet points turned into functional units with explicit data added. As the signature requires a text is transformed into another text. See the input of the first functional unit and the output of the last functional unit. In between no text flows, but words and lines. That´s good to see because thereby the domain is clearly represented in the design. The requirements are talking about words and lines and here they are. But note the asterisk! It´s not outside the brackets but inside. That means it´s not a stream of words or lines, but lists or sequences. For each text a sequence of words is output. For each sequence of words a sequence of lines is produced. The asterisk is used to abstract from the concrete implementation. Like with streams. Whether the list of words gets implemented as an array or an IEnumerable is not important during design. It´s an implementation detail. Does any processing step require further refinement? I don´t think so. They all look pretty “atomic” to me. And if not… I can always backtrack and refine a process step using functional design later once I´ve gained more insight into a sub-problem. Implementation The implementation is straightforward as you can imagine. The processing steps can all be translated into functions. Each can be tested easily and separately. Each has a focused responsibility. And the process flow becomes just a sequence of function calls: Easy to understand. It clearly states how word wrapping works - on a high level of abstraction. And it´s easy to evolve as you´ll see. Flow Design - Increment 2 So far only texts consisting of “average words” are wrapped correctly. Words not fitting in a line will result in lines too long. Wrapping long words is a feature of the requested functionality. Whether it´s there or not makes a difference to the user. To quickly get feedback I decided to first implement a solution without this feature. But now it´s time to add it to deliver the full scope. Fortunately Flow Design automatically leads to code following the Open Closed Principle (OCP). It´s easy to extend it - instead of changing well tested code. How´s that possible? Flow Design allows for extension of functionality by inserting functional units into the flow. That way existing functional units need not be changed. The data flow arrow between functional units is a natural extension point. No need to resort to the Strategy Pattern. No need to think ahead where extions might need to be made in the future. I just “phase in” the remaining processing step: Since neither Extract words nor Reformat know of their environment neither needs to be touched due to the “detour”. The new processing step accepts the output of the existing upstream step and produces data compatible with the existing downstream step. Implementation - Increment 2 A trivial implementation checking the assumption if this works does not do anything to split long words. The input is just passed on: Note how clean WordWrap() stays. The solution is easy to understand. A developer looking at this code sometime in the future, when a new feature needs to be build in, quickly sees how long words are dealt with. Compare this to Robert C. Martin´s solution:[4] How does this solution handle long words? Long words are not even part of the domain language present in the code. At least I need considerable time to understand the approach. Admittedly the Flow Design solution with the full implementation of long word splitting is longer than Robert C. Martin´s. At least it seems. Because his solution does not cover all the “word wrap situations” the Flow Design solution handles. Some lines would need to be added to be on par, I guess. But even then… Is a difference in LOC that important as long as it´s in the same ball park? I value understandability and openness for extension higher than saving on the last line of code. Simplicity is not just less code, it´s also clarity in design. But don´t take my word for it. Try Flow Design on larger problems and compare for yourself. What´s the easier, more straightforward way to clean code? And keep in mind: You ain´t seen all yet ;-) There´s more to Flow Design than described in this chapter. In closing I hope I was able to give you a impression of functional design that makes you hungry for more. To me it´s an inevitable step in software development. Jumping from requirements to code does not scale. And it leads to dirty code all to quickly. Some thought should be invested first. Where there is a clear Entry Point visible, it´s functionality should be designed using data flows. Because with data flows abstraction is possible. For more background on why that´s necessary read my blog article here. For now let me point out to you - if you haven´t already noticed - that Flow Design is a general purpose declarative language. It´s “programming by intention” (Shalloway et al.). Just write down how you think the solution should work on a high level of abstraction. This breaks down a large problem in smaller problems. And by following the PoMO the solutions to those smaller problems are independent of each other. So they are easy to test. Or you could even think about getting them implemented in parallel by different team members. Flow Design not only increases evolvability, but also helps becoming more productive. All team members can participate in functional design. This goes beyon collective code ownership. We´re talking collective design/architecture ownership. Because with Flow Design there is a common visual language to talk about functional design - which is the foundation for all other design activities.   PS: If you like what you read, consider getting my ebook “The Incremental Architekt´s Napkin”. It´s where I compile all the articles in this series for easier reading. I like the strictness of Function Programming - but I also find it quite hard to live by. And it certainly is not what millions of programmers are used to. Also to me it seems, the real world is full of state and side effects. So why give them such a bad image? That´s why functional design takes a more pragmatic approach. State and side effects are ok for processing steps - but be sure to follow the SRP. Don´t put too much of it into a single processing step. ? Image taken from www.physioweb.org ? My code samples are written in C#. C# sports typed function pointers called delegates. Action is such a function pointer type matching functions with signature void someName(T t). Other languages provide similar ways to work with functions as first class citizens - even Java now in version 8. I trust you find a way to map this detail of my translation to your favorite programming language. I know it works for Java, C++, Ruby, JavaScript, Python, Go. And if you´re using a Functional Programming language it´s of course a no brainer. ? Taken from his blog post “The Craftsman 62, The Dark Path”. ?

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Backup SQL databases to Box or SkyDrive

    - by Pinal Dave
    To ensure your SQL Server or Azure databases remain safe, you should backup your databases periodically. And it is important to store the backups in a reliable location. Microsoft SkyDrive currently offers 7GB free, Box offers 5GB free – both are reliable and it is simple to send your backups there. SQLBackupAndFTP in it’s latest version 9 added the option to backup to SkyDrive and Box ( in addition to local/network folder, NAS drive, FTP, Dropbox, Google Drive and Amazon S3). Just select the databases that you’d like to backup and select to store the backups in SkyDrive or Box. Below I will show you how to do it in details Select databases to backup First connect to your SQL Server or Azure Sql Database. Then select the databases you’d like to backup. Connect to SkyDrive or Box cloud If you have a free version of SQLBackupAndFTP Box destination is included, but SkyDrive destination will be disabled as it is available in the Standard version or above. Click “Try now” to get 30 days trial on all options On the “SkyDrive Settings” form you’ll need to authorize SQLBackupAndFTP to access your SkyDrive. Click “Authorize…” to open SkyDrive authorization page in your browser, sign in your to SkyDrive account and click at “Allow” . On the next page you will see the field with authorization code. Copy it to the clipboard. Box operation is just the same. After that return to SQLBackupAndFTP, paste the authorization code and click “OK” . After you are authorized, you can enter the path to a backup folder. SQLBackupAndFTP will create the folder if it does not exist. That’s all what has to be done to backup to SkyDrive or Box cloud.  You can now click on “Run Now” button to test this job. Conclusion Whatever is your preference for storing SQL backups, it is easy with SQLBackupAndFTP. Note that at the time of this writing they are running a very rare promotion on volume licenses: 5–9 licenses: 20% off 10–19 licenses: 35% off more than 20 licenses: 50% off Please let me know your favorite options for storing the backups. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL

    Read the article

  • Recommended (remote) backup technique for SQL Compact?

    - by Cool Jon
    Hello. Is there a generally recommended approach to backing up an SQL CE/SQLite database over the Internet? The client source is .NET/Windows based, the backup destination runs Ubuntu. I am using a small SQL CE database and have been trying to figure out the most reasonable approach to doing this. The file size (in terms of transfer time/bandwidth) isn't a big deal. I had a look around, and so far the things I've given thought are: Online backup services (Dropbox, Mozy) Opening an FTP/SFTP connection Writing a custom protocol with public/private keys Unsure regarding #1 because I doubt they would like it if somebody transferred gigabytes of data using a POST; and they do not seem to offer native (or .NET) APIs. FTP/SFTP seems risky in terms of security and privileges (as the password/key would need to be stored on the client side). With the right user group/user privileges this may work. Custom protocol seems overkill, which is why I am hoping somebody has already defined a reasonable API for language/platform-independent backups over the Internet. Any hints S.O.?

    Read the article

  • Moving from SVN to HG : branching and backup

    - by rorycl
    My company runs svn right now and we are very familiar with it. However, because we do a lot of concurrent development, merging can become very complicated.. We've been playing with hg and we really like the ability to make fast and effective clones on a per-feature basis. We've got two main issues we'd like to resolve before we move to hg: Branches for erstwhile svn users I'm familiar with the "4 ways to branch in Mercurial" as set out in Steve Losh's article. We think we should "materialise" the branches because I think the dev team will find this the most straightforward way of migrating from svn. Consequently I guess we should follow the "branching with clones" model which means that separate clones for branches are made on the server. While this means that every clone/branch needs to be made on the server and published separately, this isn't too much of an issue for us as we are used to checking out svn branches which come down as separate copies. I'm worried, however, that merging changes and following history may become difficult between branches in this model. Backup If programmers in our team make local clones of a branch, how do they backup the local clone? We're used to seeing svn commit messages like this on a feature branch "Interim commit: db function not yet working". I can't see a way of doing this easily in hg. Advice gratefully received. Rory

    Read the article

  • What is a ‘best practice’ backup plan for a website?

    - by HollerTrain
    I have a website which is very large and has a large user-base. I am trying to think of a 'best practice' way to create a back up or mirror website, so if something happens on domain.com, I can quickly point the site to backup.domain.com via 401 redirect. This would give me time to troubleshoot domain.com while everyone is viewing backup.domain.com and not knowing the difference. Is my method the ideal method, or have you enacted better methods to creating a backup site? I don't want to have the site go down and then get yelled at every minute while I'm trying to fix it. Ideally I would just 'flip the switch' and it would redirect the user to a backup. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 won't recognize backup set can I script extracting the files in some other way?

    - by datatoo
    The Windows 7 Backup/Restore created multiple backup sets and I was able to restore the oldest version, but not the most recent, which is not seen by the application. I do see all of the zip files and there are hundreds in later versions. Is there a way to extract each of these correctly outside of the regular restoration method? Perhaps scripting an extract of each day one after another? further clarifying The backup files were all made to an external drive. The original computer died completely, power supply, drives everything. I am trying to reconstruct as much as possible and the only backup set recognized is 6 months older. This was recovered over a new install, but unzipping thousands of zip files is not really a simple unzip copy project as the original paths are not a simple thing to reconstruct.

    Read the article

  • What backup solution for Windows 2008 R2 servers on XenServer 5.0?

    - by Niels R.
    A friend of mine is hosting a lot of Linux VM's on his servers using XenServer 5.0. He uses rdiff-backup to make daily backups. I'm trying to convince him to host some Windows VM's (Windows 2008 R2 Web Edition) too, so he could provide (me) .NET hosting. The main problem at the moment is a backup strategy for these Windows VM's. I would like to see something like a weekly full backup (snapshot of the VM?) with daily incrementals. I've looked at Windows Backup, but because the backups are made onto network shares it doesn't provide incrementals (for what I understand). Does anyone has any experience with this situation? How did you solve this in a "not-too-hard-to-install/maintain" way?

    Read the article

  • How to backup boot information of a PC's Hard Disk?

    - by Bear Bear
    I just installed Windows 7 on a partition of my hard disk and I'm planning to install Vista and Windows 8 on other partitions on the same disk, and maybe a few Linux distributions too. Before I install other Operating Systems, I would like to backup the boot information, just to make sure I can get back to Windows 7 in case anything goes wrong with the booting data. I already made a backup of the MBR using MBRFix but I'm wondering if I should save some Boot Sector from the Windows 7 partition? I noticed that Windows Vista install DVD has a "bootrec.exe" utility in the recovery console (Shift+F10) and it has some options to rewrite the boot sector of the partitions. Therefore I wonder if there is any utility (preferably on Hiren's BootCD) to backup/write the boot sector I would also like to know how to backup the boot data of a Linux installation

    Read the article

  • How to fix 0x80071A91 error in Windows Vista / backup Vista system?

    - by John
    I am getting this error below: "File backup could not save your automatic backup settings for the following reason: Transaction support within the specified file system resource manager is not started or was shutdown due to an error. (0x80071A91) Please try again." I tryed this (to fix) on cmd: “fsutil resource setautoreset true C:\” as an adm But did not work. What I want is to make a backup of all my files.

    Read the article

  • Why is windows 7 backup and restore utility using so much disc space?

    - by stuckey
    note: this is a reformation of a previous question, see: How exactly does the Backup and Restore utility in Windows7 work? I have per the task scheduler scheduled windows 7 backup and utility to run once a day. The amount of data I produce in a day is best measured in KiB yet, a few GiB of data is added to the backup destination set in the backup utility daily. Why is this? Is this due to this utility making what are called "normal" backups instead of "incremental" backups? If so, how can this setting be changed?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to do a full Android backup without first rooting the phone?

    - by Howiecamp
    I'm running stock 2.1 on my Moto Droid and am interested in rooting. My (admittedly weak at this point) understanding is that, in order to perform a backup[*], you need to root first. But in order to root, you've got to replace the 2.1 image with a rooted 2.0.1 or a stock 2.0.1 and then a rooted 2.1. So there's no CYA protection given that you've got to take the risk of replacing the image in order to get root and then do a backup. [*] Ideally, I'd like to backup the stock 2.1 image AND my apps. Am I understanding this correctly, or is there a way to do a backup without first replacing the image?

    Read the article

  • Parallelize incremental processing in Tabular #ssas #tabular

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    I recently came in a problem trying to improve the parallelism of Tabular processing. As you know, multiple tables can be processed in parallel, whereas the processing of several partitions within the same table cannot be parallelized. When you perform an incremental update by adding only new rows to existing table, what you really do is adding rows to a partition, so adding rows to many tables means adding rows to several partitions. The particular condition you have in this case is that every partition in which you add rows belongs to a different table. Adding rows implies using the ProcessAdd command; its QueryBinding parameter specifies a SQL syntax to read new rows, otherwise the original query specified for the partition will be used, and it could generate duplicated data if you don’t have a dynamic behavior on the SQL side. If you create the required XMLA code manually, you will find that the QueryBinding node that should be part of the ProcessAdd command has to be moved out from ProcessAdd in case you are using a Batch command with more than one Process command (which is the reason why you want to use a single batch: run multiple process operations in parallel!). If you use AMO (Analysis Management Objects) you will find that this combination is not supported, even if you don’t have a syntax error compiling the code, but you might obtain this error at execution time: The syntax for the 'Process' command is incorrect. The 'Bindings' keyword cannot appear under a 'Process' command if the 'Process' command is a part of a 'Batch' command and there are more than one 'Process' commands in the 'Batch' or the 'Batch' command contains any out of line related information. In this case, the 'Bindings' keyword should be a part of the 'Batch' command only. If this is happening to you, the best solution I’ve found is manipulating the XMLA code generated by AMO moving the Binding nodes in the right place. A more detailed description of the issue and the code required to send a correct XMLA batch to Analysis Services is available in my article Parallelize ProcessAdd with AMO. By the way, the same technique (and code) can be used also if you have the same problem in a Multidimensional model.

    Read the article

  • Aging SBS needs updates / Thoughts for one-off, off-line complete backup?

    - by tcv
    Hey guys, So, we checked out the status of an SBS 2003 at one of our more recent, spend-averse clients and found it to be woefully out-of-date. Scary out of date. I think it's running IE2. Ok, maybe not that far back. Anyway, I was thinking that I could use some kind of disk-imaging software to image the four IDE drives within and, in the event the server gets some kind of Update Induced Indigestion, I could completely restore. Usually my go-to software for this is Acronis, but my client will likely balk at a $500 price tag for a one-off backup with their server product. I had thought we could use the boot media from, say, Backup & Recovery 10 to take an off-line image of all the drives. According to their CHAT tech support, however, it will not work. I pressed for the technical reasons and they said they'd email me. They haven't emailed me. They still might. This server is running SBS 2003, pre sp2. It's got four IDE disks. One is a Basic disk, which contains the O/S. The others are bound as a dynamic disk. You might ask: "Don't they already have backup software?" They do! Backup Exec, a very low-end version that won't even do VSS. I don't know much about BE, but it seems to me that if the worst were to happen, it would mean building a new server O/S, installing BE (if the media is available), then restoring. Would it even work? I can take the system down for hours to do a backup and my goal here is a pretty dead-simple restore if the worst happens. Any and all suggestions are exciting. m

    Read the article

  • eCryptFS: How to mount a backup of an encrypted home dir?

    - by Boldewyn
    I use eCryptFS to encrypt the home directory of my laptop. My backup script copies the encrypted files to a server (together with everything else in (home/.ecryptfs). How can I mount the encrypted files of the backup? I'd like to verify that I can do that, and that everything is in place. My naive try with mount -t ecryptfs /backup/home/.ecryptfs/boldewyn /mnt/test didn't work, eCryptFS wanted to create a new partition.

    Read the article

  • eCryptFS: How to mount a backup of an encrypted home dir?

    - by Boldewyn
    I use eCryptFS to encrypt the home directory of my laptop. My backup script copies the encrypted files to a server (together with everything else in (home/.ecryptfs). How can I mount the encrypted files of the backup? I'd like to verify that I can do that, and that everything is in place. My naive try with mount -t ecryptfs /backup/home/.ecryptfs/boldewyn /mnt/test didn't work, eCryptFS wanted to create a new partition.

    Read the article

  • How to backup old emails locally in Thunderbird and then remove them from IMAP server?

    - by saicode
    I am using Godaddy IMAP email with Thunderbird as my desktop client on Windows 7. The email service has unlimited mailbox size but the local Thunderbird is having troubles due to the large size of the inbox/outbox. I would like to take out old emails from IMAP server and backup them locally. After backing up the old email I would like to delete old email (older than let's say, 2012) from the server. Also I'd like to have them accessible from the local backup if ever needed in the future. This way I might be able to make Thunderbird fast and problem free. Problem is, I am not able to find any instruction to do this in an automated way based on dates etc. I can find some links for Archiving, Compacting and Backup. But unable to find any tutorial about how to backup and archive it locally and delete the original emails from the server.

    Read the article

  • How to ignore hard drives size with Windows Server Backup (Win-2008) restore?

    - by Jason
    I used Windows Server Backup to backup my 640GB boot drive. Only about 30GB is used, and the backup was very fast. Now I am trying to restore the image to a 500GB hard drive but it is saying that the drive is too small... even though I only had 30GB on the original backup. How do I overide this and have the restore ignore that I only have a 500GB drive? If I can't, then I can't restore the hard drive with anything except one that is equal to or bigger than the original hard drive - which would be a real bummer.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36  | Next Page >