Search Results

Search found 22000 results on 880 pages for 'worker process'.

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 34/880 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

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

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

    Read the article

  • kill a hung mount process

    - by John P
    I have a virtual machine drive that ran out of space, so I shutdown the VM, extended the volume using lvextend. After resizing the partition (ext3), I ran e2fsck on it, and it found and corrected errors. Unfortunately, when I ran efsck one more time, there were more errors that had to be fixed. I went through 3 rounds of e2fsck before I decided to try mounting it to clean up some space manually. I tried mounting it, but the mount process hung. I tried to "kill -9" the mount process, but that did not kill it. I killed the parent process, but that did not kill it either. Any ideas on how to kill a rogue mount process? Some evidence: ps -l 13292 F S UID PID PPID C PRI NI ADDR SZ WCHAN TTY TIME CMD 4 R 0 13292 1 99 85 0 - 17964 - ? 11:27 mount /dev/mapper/xen7-123p3 /tmp/p3/ lsof -p 13292 COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME mount 13292 root cwd DIR 9,2 4096 25264129 /root mount 13292 root rtd DIR 9,2 4096 2 / mount 13292 root txt REG 9,2 61656 2916434 /bin/mount mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 144776 31457282 /lib64/ld-2.5.so mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 1718232 31457284 /lib64/libc-2.5.so mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 23360 31457291 /lib64/libdl-2.5.so mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 43808 31457783 /lib64/libblkid.so.1.0 mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 247496 31457331 /lib64/libsepol.so.1 mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 95464 31457337 /lib64/libselinux.so.1 mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 154640 31457491 /lib64/libdevmapper.so.1.02 mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 17936 31457472 /lib64/libuuid.so.1.2 mount 13292 root mem REG 9,2 56438208 12684878 /usr/lib/locale/locale-archive mount 13292 root 0u CHR 136,11 0t0 13 /dev/pts/11 (deleted) mount 13292 root 1u CHR 136,11 0t0 13 /dev/pts/11 (deleted) mount 13292 root 2u CHR 136,11 0t0 13 /dev/pts/11 (deleted) umount -f /tmp/p3/ umount2: Invalid argument umount: /tmp/p3/: not mounted

    Read the article

  • background process outputs to the console

    - by broiyan
    Suppose test.sh is a bash script that is empty or contains only exit 0. When the script is backgrounded, what is the significance of the 1 and 16320 printed to the console? b@sam:~/Documents/bashscripts$ ./test.sh & [1] 16320 b@sam:~/Documents/bashscripts$ [1]+ Done ./test.sh b@sam:~/Documents/bashscripts$ Then if user hits ENTER at the command prompt, as illustrated above, another line appears and it shows this [1]+ Done ./test.sh What is the significance of the 1 digit and the + symbol?

    Read the article

  • "Fatal Error" message during boot process

    - by Denja
    I'm running Ubuntu 10.10 with ATI proprietary FGLRX graphic drivers When I boot, I can see this very quick message appearing; I don't have time to read it: **Fatal Error ..................................**(&@something i cant read) I searched through the log file in /var/log/ in order to find what is wrong and I did find something in the /var/log/Xorg.1.log: 21:31:08 [ 15.734] (--) using VT number 1 [ 204.647] Fatal server error: [ 204.647] xf86OpenConsole: VT_WAITACTIVE failed: Interrupted system call [ 204.647] [ 204.647] Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support at http://wiki.x.org for help. [ 204.647] Please also check the log file at "/var/log/Xorg.1.log" for additional information. [ 204.647] But this is already Xorg.1.log. And there is a Xorg.0.log also & Xorg.0.log.old but it doesnt have any error in it. My system seems to work properly and it seems its not affected by this But how do I correct this message? Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Interviewing Process (using blank paper etc)

    - by MJH
    I am curious to know why do companies hand you a blank paper and ask you to write code? This confuses me, because these days intellisense, google, stackoverflow etc are common sources to look up syntax and / or IDE gives you a colored indicator if your syntax is wrong. I usually get stressed out during these situations. I am curious to know opinions of other developers. I am posting this on this forum, hoping to get helpful feedback from other experienced developers.

    Read the article

  • Should I listen to my employer and use CASE tools?

    - by omsharp
    My employer (Not a Developer) thinks that CASE tools will help us improve our development process and documentation. I am not sure about that, we are a small team of 5 developers building mobile banking solutions for local clients. I think CASE tools will be a waste of time and money as they need to be purchased and we will need some time before we get used to them and be efficient working with them for modeling and stuff. Code generation is another issue, I really think that the CASE generated code won't be as good as code written by good developers. I think that if we stick with agile princeliness, design patterns, use TDD, and keep our code clean. we should be good. And as far as Analysis and Design, I think simple UML diagrams on whiteboard should do the trick. Documentation is good and important, but should be made as little as possible and we should not focus on Docs and forget the code. This is what i think. Am I correct? or should I listen to my employer and start researching for an appropriate CASE Tool?

    Read the article

  • Game crash/Screen freeze recovery (without shell or reboot)

    - by Asavar Tzeth
    I am an old Windows PC gamer, now converted into Ubuntu (Linux) lover. I am even going so far as to attempt to replace all my games in a Windows dual-boot with Wine and it is going well. However... Even if Linux is less prone to crashing, games, especially the windows ones (but also a few native) can crash. My problem is when this is in full screen and the computer becomes non-responsive. In Windows you can solve this with ctrl+alt+delete, but Ubuntu lacks this feature and my only choice is a reboot. Is there any Ubuntu version of this feature? Of course excepting the ctrl+alt+F1, find and kill process method. It is fine if you know how to do it, but too slow and difficult for the typical gamer. I believe strongly in Ubuntu as the future gaming platform in one form or another. If this feature does not exist, then the Ubuntu team should address this as fast as possible, since it is critical for all old Windows gamers. Thank you for your time. Asavar Tzeth (Alias)

    Read the article

  • Design help with parallel process

    - by brazc0re
    I am re-factoring some code and an having an issue with retrieving data from two parallel processes. I have an application that sends packets back and forth via different mediums (ex: RS232, TCP/IP, etc). The jist if of this question is that there are two parallel processes going on. I hope the picture below displays what is going on better than I can word it: SetupRS232() class creates a new instance of the SerialPort by: SerialPort serialPort = new SerialPort(); My question is, what is the best way that the Communicator() class, which sends out the packet via the respective medium, get access to the SerialPort object from the SetupRS232 class? I can do it with a Singleton but have heard that they are generally not the best design to go by. I am trying to follow SRP but I do feel like I am doing something wrong here. Communicator() will need to go out of it's way to get access to SetupRS232() to get access to the SerialPort class. I actually haven't found a way to even get access to it. Would designing each medium class, for example, SetupRS232(), SetupTCPIP, as a singleton be the best way to approach this problem?

    Read the article

  • Simple step by step process to import MS Access data into SQL Server using SSIS

    Sometimes we need to import information from MS Access. We could use the Microsoft SQL Server Migration Assistant, but sometimes we need to add custom transformations and it is necessary to use more sophisticated tools. In this tip, we are going to walk through step by step how to migrate a MS Access table to SQL Server using SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS). What are your servers really trying to tell you? Find out with new SQL Monitor 3.0, an easy-to-use tool built for no-nonsense database professionals.For effortless insights into SQL Server, download a free trial today.

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • design an extendible and pluggable business logic flow handler in php

    - by Broncha
    I am working on a project where I need to allow a pluggable way to inject business processes in the normal data flow. eg There is an ordering system. The standard flow of the application is A consumer orders an item. Pays for it and card is authorized. Admin captures the payment. Order is marked as complete and item is shipped. But this process may vary (extra steps in between) for different clients. Say a client would need to validate the location of the consumer before he is presented with a credit card form, OR his policies might require some other processes in between. I am thinking of using State Pattern for processing orders, saving the current state of the order in database, and initializing the state of order from the saved state. I would also need some mechanism, where a small plugin would be able to inject business specific states in the state machine. Am I thinking the right way? Are there already implemented patterns for this kind of situation? I am working with Codeigniter and basically this would mean for me, to redirect to proper controller according to the current state of the order. Like, if the state of the order is unconfirmed then redirect the user to details page and then change the state to pending. If some client would need to do some validation, then register an intermediate state between unconfirmed and pending Please suggest.

    Read the article

  • Should developers be involved in testing phases?

    - by LudoMC
    Hi, we are using a classical V-shaped development process. We then have requirements, architecture, design, implementation, integration tests, system tests and acceptance. Testers are preparing test cases during the first phases of the project. The issue is that, due to resources issues (*), test phases are too long and are often shortened due to time constraints (you know project managers... ;)). So my question is simple: should developers be involved in the tests phases and isn't it too 'dangerous'. I'm afraid it will give the project managers a false feeling of better quality as the work has been done but would the added man.days be of any value? I'm not really confident of developers doing tests (no offense here but we all know it's quite hard to break in a few clicks what you have made in severals days). Thanks for sharing your thoughts. (*) For obscure reasons, increasing the number of testers is not an option as of today. (Just upfront, it's not a duplicate of Should programmers help testers in designing tests? which talks about test preparation and not test execution, where we avoid the implication of developers)

    Read the article

  • Correct process for creating builds reliant on 3rd party packages

    - by Patrick
    I work on a Symfony 2 codebase. We use a number of third-party packages (most are in the Symfony Standard Edition). We use composer for dependencies. We current have all of our third-party code committed in our repository (after changing .gitignore files) to ensure stability. According to Proper Programming Practices™, we are not supposed to have any third-party packages in our repo. We are supposed to pull them down and include them at build time. How are we to do proper QA and debugging when at any given time our dependencies could push an update that breaks functionality?

    Read the article

  • Process that needs a volume starting before volume mounts

    - by user36126
    The destination for incoming CrashPlan backups on my server (11.04) is /media/SeagateBig (SeagateBig is the volume name of my 2TB USB drive). When the server boots, two things happen: 1) SeagateBig auto-mounts and 2) CrashPlan starts. The problem is, that often these two things don't happen in that order. Then I get: Crashplan starts looks for /media/SeagateBig doesn't find it instead of waiting for it, CREATES IT Now it's backing up onto my / filesystem. NOT COOL. Meanwhile, when SeagateBig finally gets around to mounting, it finds that /media/SeagateBig already exists, shrugs, and creates /media/SeagateBig_ as its mount point. What I need is a way for the order to be enforced - where SeagateBig mounts and then and only then the CrashPlan service is started. Unless I learn that CrashPlan can be told to wait for its destination directory, never to create it... which I am also investigating. But the CrashPlanEngine script is installed by the product so I am loath to modify it, as I know I could by having it loop until df greps successfully for "SeagateBig".

    Read the article

  • How does the Ubuntu upgrade process work?

    - by IDWMaster
    How does Ubuntu upgrade seamlessly to a newer distribution, while the operating system is still running? I'm upgrading from 10.10 to 11.04, and I've upgraded several times before, and it's as simple as running update-manager -d and downloading and installing them, then rebooting. How exactly does this work though? How is the upgrade manager able to update the operating system while it is still in use?

    Read the article

  • Google Search Engine Optimization - The 3 Step Process to Search Engine Domination

    Would you like more targeted traffic to your website? Would you like to know how to get a stream of profitable customers visiting your site for keywords people are actually searching for? Are you overwhelmed by the complexity of SEO? If you answered yes to any of these questions then the easy 3 step Strategy to Google domination is exactly what you are looking for. In this article I reveal the 3 simple tactics for consistent top ten rankings.

    Read the article

  • Step-To-Step Process to Create Coupon Sites

    Creating coupon sites is one of the ways to create money online; in fact it is also one of the most sought after online business these days. It is because of the fact that most individuals these days are always looking for ways to acquire great discounts for the things that they need.

    Read the article

  • Why would the Apache parent process restart silently?

    - by miracle
    I run apache 2.2.9 with mpm prefork on debian lenny. Following http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/prefork.html, I would expect that there is one parent process, running as root and listening as configured, which would start child processes as defined by the Min/Max/etc. directives. I expect the children to be restarted as per MaxRequestsPerChild, but the parent process to stay put with one process id until I restart it manually. Out of a little paranoia, I started monitoring listening ports including process ids. I have a cron job every 20 minutes to run netstat -ap | grep LISTEN and diff the output. Sometimes (about once per day) I see a series of this: 8c8 < tcp6 0 0 [::]:www [::]:* LISTEN 6194/apache2 --- tcp6 0 0 [::]:www [::]:* LISTEN 6607/apache2 10c10 < tcp6 0 0 [::]:https [::]:* LISTEN 6194/apache2 --- tcp6 0 0 [::]:https [::]:* LISTEN 6607/apache2 Over a period of an hour or three, the parent would change its pid at least once every 20 minutes, without any explanation in the log files or any other hint that anything is going wrong. This is not what I expected. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Reliance on the compiler

    - by koan
    I've been programming in C and C++ for some time, although I would say I'm far from being expert. For some time I've been using various strategies to develop my code such as unit tests, test driven design, code reviews and so on. When I wrote my first programs in BASIC I typed in long listings before finding they would not run and they were a nightmare to debug. So I learnt to write a small bit and then test it. These days I often find myself repeatedly writing a small bit of code then using the compiler to find all the mistakes. That's OK if it picks up a typo but when you start adjusting the parameters types etc just to make it compile you can screw up the design. It also seems that the compiler is creeping into the design process when it should only be used for checking syntax. There's a danger here of over reliance on the compiler to make my programs better. Are there better strategies than this ? I vaguely remember some time ago an article on a company developing a type of C compiler where an extra header file also specified the prototypes. The idea was that inconsistencies in the API definition would be easier to catch if you had to define it twice in different ways.

    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 | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >