Search Results

Search found 7436 results on 298 pages for 'simultaneous calls'.

Page 36/298 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

  • How do I Reload Ajax Call Parameters without Reloading the webpage

    - by Snowright
    I'm working with Extjs 2.2.1 with Alfresco 3.2 enterprise. I would like to update the ticket that handles authentication to the alfresco server on components that have been loaded during login. This ticket expires after a set time and this is why I will need to update the ticket. Options that do not seem viable for me(but please let me know if I'm wrong): Reload the components to reload the call parameters - I can't do this because it resets whatever the user was previously working on (ie. Tree panel gets reloaded, grid filters reset, etc). The actual webpage never reloads as everything uses ajax calls to update things on the page. Create a global variable that stores the ticket and attach it as a call parameter with any ajax calls - Any components that were loaded during login will still use the original ticket to make calls to the server.

    Read the article

  • Can I use a single instance of a delegate to start multiple Asynchronous Requests?

    - by RobV
    Just wondered if someone could clarify the use of BeginInvoke on an instance of some delegate when you want to make multiple asynchronous calls since the MSDN documentation doesn't really cover/mention this at all. What I want to do is something like the following: MyDelegate d = new MyDelegate(this.TargetMethod); List<IAsyncResult> results = new List<IAsyncResult>(); //Start multiple asynchronous calls for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) { results.Add(d.BeginInvoke(someParams, null, null)); } //Wait for all my calls to finish WaitHandle.WaitAll(results.Select(r => r.AsyncWaitHandle).ToArray()); //Process the Results The question is can I do this with one instance of the delegate or do I need an instance of the delegate for each individual call? Given that EndInvoke() takes an IAsyncResult as a parameter I would assume that the former is correct but I can't see anything in the documentation to indicate either way.

    Read the article

  • Sql Server related question

    - by stefan
    Hi guys, I have this thing that i need to do and some advices will be greatly appreciated. I have a Sql server table with some phone calls.For each phone call i have the start and end time. What i need to accomplish: a stored procedure which for a certain period of time, let's say 5 hours at a x interval, lets say 2 minutes returns the number of connected calls. Something like: Interval Nr of Calls Connected 01-01-2010 12:00:00 - 01-01-2010 12:05:00 30 01-01-2010 12:05:01 - 01-01-2010 12:10:00 10 ............. Which will be the fastest way to do that? Thank you for your help

    Read the article

  • Handling missing data

    - by soppotare
    Say I have a simple helpdesk application which logs calls made by users. I would typically have such fields in a table relating to the call e.g. CallID, Description, CustomerID etc. I Would also have a table of customers including CustomerID, Username, Password, FullName etc. Now when a user is deleted from the customers table then the inner join between the calls table and the users table to find out historically which user logged a call would produce no results. How do people usually deal with this? Have seperate customer and useraccount tables Just disable the accounts so the data is still available Record the customers name in the calls table as a seperate field. or any other methods / suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Why does the compiler give an ambiguous invocation error when passing inherited types?

    - by Matt Mitchell
    What is happening in the C# compiler to cause the following ambiguous invocation compilation error? The same issue applies to extension methods, or when TestClass is generic and using instance rather than static methods. class Type1 { } class Type2 : Type1 {} class TestClass { public static void Do<T>(T something, object o) where T : Type1 {} public static void Do(Type1 something, string o) {} } void Main() { var firstInstance = new Type1(); TestClass.Do(firstInstance, new object()); // Calls Do(Type1, obj) TestClass.Do(firstInstance, "Test"); // Calls Do<T>(T, string) var secondInstance = new Type2(); TestClass.Do(secondInstance, new object()); // Calls Do(Type1, obj) TestClass.Do(secondInstance, "Test"); // "The call is ambiguous" compile error }

    Read the article

  • Date range advanced count calculation in TSQL

    - by cihata87
    I am working on call center project and I have to calculate the call arrivals at the same time between specific time ranges. I have to write a procedure which has parameters StartTime, EndTime and Interval For Example: Start Time: 11:00 End Time: 12:00 Interval: 20 minutes so program should divide the 1-hour time range into 3 parts and each part should count the arrivals which started and finished in this range OR arrivals which started and haven't finished yet Should be like this: 11:00 - 11:20 15 calls at the same time(TimePeaks) 11:20 - 11:40 21 calls ... 11:40 - 12:00 8 calls ... Any suggestions how to calculate them?

    Read the article

  • cookieless sessions with ajax

    - by thezver
    ok, i know you get sick from this subject. me too :( I've been developing a quite "big application" with PHP & kohana framework past 2 years, somewhat-successfully using my framework's authentication mechanism. but within this time, and as the app grown, many concerning state-preservation issues arisen. main problems are that cookie-driven sessions: can't be used for web-service access ( at least it's really not nice to do so.. ) in many cases problematic with mobile access don't allow multiple simultaneous apps on same browser ( can be resolved by hard trickery, but still.. ) requires many configurations and mess to work 100% right, and that's without the --browser issues ( disabled cookies, old browsers bugs & vulnerabilities etc ) many other session flaws stated in this old thread : http://lists.nyphp.org/pipermail/talk/2006-December/020358.html After a really long research, and without any good library/on-hand-solution to feet my needs, i came up with a custom solution to majority of those problems . Basically, i'ts about emulating sessions with ajax calls, with additional security/performance measures: state preserved by interchanging SID(+hash) with client on ajax calls. state data saved in memcache(or equivalent), indexed by SID security achieved by: appending unpredictible hash to SID egenerating hash on each request & validating it validating fingerprint of client on each request ( referrer,os,browser etc) (*)condition: ajax calls are not simultaneous, to prevent race-condition with session token. (hopefully Ext-Direct solves that for me) From the first glance that supposed to be not-less-secure than equivalent cookie-driven implementation, and at the same time it's simple, maintainable, and resolves all the cookies flaws.. But i'm really concerned because i often hear the rule "don't try to implement custom security solutions". I will really appreciate any serious feedback about my method, and any alternatives. also, any tip about how to preserve state on page-refresh without cookies would be great :) but thats small technical prob. Sorry if i overlooked some similar post.. there are billions of them about sessions . Big thanks in advance ( and for reading until here ! ).

    Read the article

  • Quartz 2D or OpenGL ES? Pros and cons in the long term, possibility of migration to other platforms.

    - by fspirit
    Hi all! I'm having a hard time deciding whether to go with Quartz2D or OpenGL for an iPad game. It will be 2D mostly, but effect-intense (simultaneous lighting effects for 10-30 objects, 10-20 simultaneous animations on the screen). So far, assuming i'm equally dumb in both technologies and have to learn them from the ground, i came to this list. (I've read several topics here, on SO, with names like "Quartz or OpenGL", but i'm still left with some questions) Quartz: Better time-to-market, because of ready to use absractions like UIView, UIImageView, CoreAnimation abstractions Open GL ES Closer to hardware, thus, performance is better. App, implemented with OpenGL ES can be easier migrated to Android, MeeGo, Windows Phone, etc. My questions are: How time will it take to rewrite Quartz 2d app to use OpenGL? Lets say it took me 2 man-month to write Quartz app, how much time will i need to rewrite it? (Please, just some subjective opinions, i'll try to summarize them somehow) Regarding the ease of migration to other platforms, when using OpenGL, is it really so? Or efforts when migrating Quartz app from iPhoneOS to Android will be not so much bigger, compared to OpenGL app migration? (Ease of migration is quite important criterion) Regarding OpenGL, should i go with OpenGL 1.1 or 2.0, concerning migration? (Android supports 2.0 through NDK, but dont know whether NDK's use will increase or decrease migration efforts)

    Read the article

  • GuestPost: Unit Testing Entity Framework (v1) Dependent Code using TypeMock Isolator

    - by Eric Nelson
    Time for another guest post (check out others in the series), this time bringing together the world of mocking with the world of Entity Framework. A big thanks to Moses for agreeing to do this. Unit Testing Entity Framework Dependent Code using TypeMock Isolator by Muhammad Mosa Introduction Unit testing data access code in my opinion is a challenging thing. Let us consider unit tests and integration tests. In integration tests you are allowed to have environmental dependencies such as a physical database connection to insert, update, delete or retrieve your data. However when performing unit tests it is often much more efficient and productive to remove environmental dependencies. Instead you will need to fake these dependencies. Faking a database (also known as mocking) can be relatively straight forward but the version of Entity Framework released with .Net 3.5 SP1 has a number of implementation specifics which actually makes faking the existence of a database quite difficult. Faking Entity Framework As mentioned earlier, to effectively unit test you will need to fake/simulate Entity Framework calls to the database. There are many free open source mocking frameworks that can help you achieve this but it will require additional effort to overcome & workaround a number of limitations in those frameworks. Examples of these limitations include: Not able to fake calls to non virtual methods Not able to fake sealed classes Not able to fake LINQ to Entities queries (replace database calls with in-memory collection calls) There is a mocking framework which is flexible enough to handle limitations such as those above. The commercially available TypeMock Isolator can do the job for you with less code and ultimately more readable unit tests. I’m going to demonstrate tackling one of those limitations using MoQ as my mocking framework. Then I will tackle the same issue using TypeMock Isolator. Mocking Entity Framework with MoQ One basic need when faking Entity Framework is to fake the ObjectContext. This cannot be done by passing any connection string. You have to pass a correct Entity Framework connection string that specifies CSDL, SSDL and MSL locations along with a provider connection string. Assuming we are going to do that, we’ll explore another limitation. The limitation we are going to face now is related to not being able to fake calls to non-virtual/overridable members with MoQ. I have the following repository method that adds an EntityObject (instance of a Blog entity) to Blogs entity set in an ObjectContext. public override void Add(Blog blog) { if(BlogContext.Blogs.Any(b=>b.Name == blog.Name)) { throw new InvalidOperationException("Blog with same name already exists!"); } BlogContext.AddToBlogs(blog); } The method does a very simple check that the name of the new Blog entity instance doesn’t exist. This is done through the simple LINQ query above. If the blog doesn’t already exist it simply adds it to the current context to be saved when SaveChanges of the ObjectContext instance (e.g. BlogContext) is called. However, if a blog with the same name exits, and exception (InvalideOperationException) will be thrown. Let us now create a unit test for the Add method using MoQ. [TestMethod] [ExpectedException(typeof(InvalidOperationException))] public void Add_Should_Throw_InvalidOperationException_When_Blog_With_Same_Name_Already_Exits() { //(1) We shouldn't depend on configuration when doing unit tests! But, //its a workaround to fake the ObjectContext string connectionString = ConfigurationManager .ConnectionStrings["MyBlogConnString"] .ConnectionString; //(2) Arrange: Fake ObjectContext var fakeContext = new Mock<MyBlogContext>(connectionString); //(3) Next Line will pass, as ObjectContext now can be faked with proper connection string var repo = new BlogRepository(fakeContext.Object); //(4) Create fake ObjectQuery<Blog>. Will be used to substitute MyBlogContext.Blogs property var fakeObjectQuery = new Mock<ObjectQuery<Blog>>("[Blogs]", fakeContext.Object); //(5) Arrange: Set Expectations //Next line will throw an exception by MoQ: //System.ArgumentException: Invalid setup on a non-overridable member fakeContext.SetupGet(c=>c.Blogs).Returns(fakeObjectQuery.Object); fakeObjectQuery.Setup(q => q.Any(b => b.Name == "NewBlog")).Returns(true); //Act repo.Add(new Blog { Name = "NewBlog" }); } This test method is checking to see if the correct exception ([ExpectedException(typeof(InvalidOperationException))]) is thrown when a developer attempts to Add a blog with a name that’s already exists. On (1) a connection string is initialized from configuration file. To retrieve the full connection string. On (2) a fake ObjectContext is being created. The ObjectContext here is MyBlogContext and its being created using this var fakeContext = new Mock<MyBlogContext>(connectionString); This way a fake context is being created using MoQ. On (3) a BlogRepository instance is created. BlogRepository has dependency on generate Entity Framework ObjectContext, MyObjectContext. And so the fake context is passed to the constructor. var repo = new BlogRepository(fakeContext.Object); On (4) a fake instance of ObjectQuery<Blog> is being created to use as a substitute to MyObjectContext.Blogs property as we will see in (5). On (5) setup an expectation for calling Blogs property of MyBlogContext and substitute the return result with the fake ObjectQuery<Blog> instance created on (4). When you run this test it will fail with MoQ throwing an exception because of this line: fakeContext.SetupGet(c=>c.Blogs).Returns(fakeObjectQuery.Object); This happens because the generate property MyBlogContext.Blogs is not virtual/overridable. And assuming it is virtual or you managed to make it virtual it will fail at the following line throwing the same exception: fakeObjectQuery.Setup(q => q.Any(b => b.Name == "NewBlog")).Returns(true); This time the test will fail because the Any extension method is not virtual/overridable. You won’t be able to replace ObjectQuery<Blog> with fake in memory collection to test your LINQ to Entities queries. Now lets see how replacing MoQ with TypeMock Isolator can help. Mocking Entity Framework with TypeMock Isolator The following is the same test method we had above for MoQ but this time implemented using TypeMock Isolator: [TestMethod] [ExpectedException(typeof(InvalidOperationException))] public void Add_New_Blog_That_Already_Exists_Should_Throw_InvalidOperationException() { //(1) Create fake in memory collection of blogs var fakeInMemoryBlogs = new List<Blog> {new Blog {Name = "FakeBlog"}}; //(2) create fake context var fakeContext = Isolate.Fake.Instance<MyBlogContext>(); //(3) Setup expected call to MyBlogContext.Blogs property through the fake context Isolate.WhenCalled(() => fakeContext.Blogs) .WillReturnCollectionValuesOf(fakeInMemoryBlogs.AsQueryable()); //(4) Create new blog with a name that already exits in the fake in memory collection in (1) var blog = new Blog {Name = "FakeBlog"}; //(5) Instantiate instance of BlogRepository (Class under test) var repo = new BlogRepository(fakeContext); //(6) Acting by adding the newly created blog () repo.Add(blog); } When running the above test method it will pass as the Add method of BlogRepository is going to throw an InvalidOperationException which is the expected behaviour. Nothing prevents us from faking out the database interaction! Even faking ObjectContext  at (2) didn’t require a connection string. On (3) Isolator sets up a faking result for MyBlogContext.Blogs when its being called through the fake instance fakeContext created on (2). The faking result is just an in-memory collection declared an initialized on (1). Finally at (6) action we call the Add method of BlogRepository passing a new Blog instance that has a name that’s already exists in the fake in-memory collection which we set up at (1). As expected the test will pass because it will throw the expected exception defined on top of the test method - InvalidOperationException. TypeMock Isolator succeeded in faking Entity Framework with ease. Conclusion We explored how to write a simple unit test using TypeMock Isolator for code which is using Entity Framework. We also explored a few of the limitations of other mocking frameworks which TypeMock is successfully able to handle. There are workarounds that you can use to overcome limitations when using MoQ or Rhino Mock, however the workarounds will require you to write more code and your tests will likely be more complex. For a comparison between different mocking frameworks take a look at this document produced by TypeMock. You might also want to check out this open source project to compare mocking frameworks. I hope you enjoyed this post Muhammad Mosa http://mosesofegypt.net/ http://twitter.com/mosessaur Screencast of unit testing Entity Framework Related Links GuestPost: Introduction to Mocking GuesPost: Typemock Isolator – Much more than an Isolation framework

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Automated Type Conversion using Expressor Studio

    - by pinaldave
    Recently I had an interesting situation during my consultation project. Let me share to you how I solved the problem using Expressor Studio. Consider a situation in which you need to read a field, such as customer_identifier, from a text file and pass that field into a database table. In the source file’s metadata structure, customer_identifier is described as a string; however, in the target database table, customer_identifier is described as an integer. Legitimately, all the source values for customer_identifier are valid numbers, such as “109380”. To implement this in an ETL application, you probably would have hard-coded a type conversion function call, such as: output.customer_identifier=stringToInteger(input.customer_identifier) That wasn’t so bad, was it? For this instance, programming this hard-coded type conversion function call was relatively easy. However, hard-coding, whether type conversion code or other business rule code, almost always means that the application containing hard-coded fields, function calls, and values is: a) specific to an instance of use; b) is difficult to adapt to new situations; and c) doesn’t contain many reusable sub-parts. Therefore, in the long run, applications with hard-coded type conversion function calls don’t scale well. In addition, they increase the overall level of effort and degree of difficulty to write and maintain the ETL applications. To get around the trappings of hard-coding type conversion function calls, developers need an access to smarter typing systems. Expressor Studio product offers this feature exactly, by providing developers with a type conversion automation engine based on type abstraction. The theory behind the engine is quite simple. A user specifies abstract data fields in the engine, and then writes applications against the abstractions (whereas in most ETL software, developers develop applications against the physical model). When a Studio-built application is run, Studio’s engine automatically converts the source type to the abstracted data field’s type and converts the abstracted data field’s type to the target type. The engine can do this because it has a couple of built-in rules for type conversions. So, using the example above, a developer could specify customer_identifier as an abstract data field with a type of integer when using Expressor Studio. Upon reading the string value from the text file, Studio’s type conversion engine automatically converts the source field from the type specified in the source’s metadata structure to the abstract field’s type. At the time of writing the data value to the target database, the engine doesn’t have any work to do because the abstract data type and the target data type are just the same. Had they been different, the engine would have automatically provided the conversion. ?Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Database, Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLAuthority News, T SQL, Technology Tagged: SSIS

    Read the article

  • Should I implement BackBone.js into my ASP.NET WebForms applications?

    - by Walter Stabosz
    Background I'm trying to improve my group's current web app development pattern. Our current pattern is something we came up with while trying to rich web apps on top of ASP.NET WebForms (none of us knew ASP.NET MVC). This is the current pattern: ! Our application is using the WinForms Framework. Our ASPX pages are essentially just HTML, we use almost no WebControls. We use JavaScript/jQuery to perform all of our UI events and AJAX calls. For a single ASPX page, we have a single .js file. All of our AJAX calls are POSTs (not RESTful at all) Our AJAX calls contact WebMethods which we have defined in a series of ASMX files. One ASMX file per business object. Why Change? I want to revise our pattern a bit for a couple of reasons: We're starting to find that our JavaScript files are getting a bit unwieldy. We're using a hodgepodge of methods for keeping our local data and DOM updates in sync. We seem to spend too much time writing code to keep things in sync, and it can get tricky to debug. I've been reading Developing Backbone.js Applications and I like a lot of what Backbone has to offer in terms of code organization and separation of concerns. However, I've gotten to the chapter on RESTful app, I started to feel some hesitation about using Backbone. The Problem The problem is our WebMethods do not really fit into the RESTful pattern, which seems to be the way Backbone wants to consume them. For now, I'd only like to address our issue of disorganized client side code. I'd like to avoid major rewrites to our WebMethods. My Questions Is it possible to use Backbone (or a similar library) to clean up our client code, while not majorly impacting our data access WebMethods? Or would trying to use Backbone in this manner be a bastardization of it's intended use? Anyone have any suggestions for improving our pattern in the area of code organization and spending less time writing DOM and data sync code?

    Read the article

  • Never Call Me at Work [Humorous Star Wars Video]

    - by Asian Angel
    Have you ever had one of those days when someone close to you calls at the worst possible time? See what happens when this stormtrooper’s wife calls him while he is at work above Tatooine! Needless to say Darth Vader is in a “less than forgiving” mood… Never Call Me At Work [YouTube] Latest Features How-To Geek ETC How To Make Hundreds of Complex Photo Edits in Seconds With Photoshop Actions How to Enable User-Specific Wireless Networks in Windows 7 How to Use Google Chrome as Your Default PDF Reader (the Easy Way) How To Remove People and Objects From Photographs In Photoshop Ask How-To Geek: How Can I Monitor My Bandwidth Usage? Internet Explorer 9 RC Now Available: Here’s the Most Interesting New Stuff Never Call Me at Work [Humorous Star Wars Video] Add an Image Properties Listing to the Context Menu in Chrome and Iron Add an Easy to View Notification Badge to Tabs in Firefox SpellBook Parks Bookmarklets in Chrome’s Context Menu Drag2Up Brings Multi-Source Drag and Drop Uploading to Firefox Enchanted Swing in the Forest Wallpaper

    Read the article

  • Google Talk Plugin in GMail on MacBook 2,1

    - by jrc03c
    I'd like to use the chat section in GMail to make phone calls. I've downloaded and installed the Google Talk plugin, and it acts like it knows what it's doing. But when I try to make calls, the internal laptop mic doesn't work at all (i.e., no one on the other end can hear me). In the GMail chat settings, I've tried selecting "Default Device" for the microphone, as well as "Internal Audio Analog Stereo." No matter which setting I try, none seem to work. As I said at the top, this is only a problem in Ubuntu; it works just fine in OSX and Windows (which means that yes, my Google Voice account is properly configured). Here are my tech specs: Ubuntu 10.10 Kernel Linux 2.6.35-24-generic Gnome 2.32.0 Google Chrome 8.0.552.237 Google Talk Plugin (google-talkplugin) 1.8.0.0-1 MacBook (2,1) w/ internal microphone Any help will be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Android -> Ruby Server Interface -> Mongodb

    - by MRabRabbit
    I've been wrecking my brain about this for a few days. I'll run my scenario by you and hopefully you can help me. In my head this is how it goes: I have an Android App. I want my Android App to make (function) calls to a MongoDB database via a Ruby Interface on the Server. e.g. Android app sends a HTTP GET ? with the function name, let's say getFriends for this user Ruby Interface receives this request from the app, grabs a thread from a thread pool and calls the appropriate function call implemented in Ruby, to the Mongodb. Ruby Interface gets results from Mongodb and sends a HTML POST to the Android app. So that's how I think it works. I know about the ruby driver for mongo db, and interacting with the mongodb from ruby but, how do I make a ruby back end listen for incoming messages and should these messages be done through sockets or a http interface ala Net::http in ruby?

    Read the article

  • Quick ways to boost performance and scalability of ASP.NET, WCF and Desktop Clients

    - by oazabir
    There are some simple configuration changes that you can make on machine.config and IIS to give your web applications significant performance boost. These are simple harmless changes but makes a lot of difference in terms of scalability. By tweaking system.net changes, you can increase the number of parallel calls that can be made from the services hosted on your servers as well as on desktop computers and thus increase scalability. By changing WCF throttling config you can increase number of simultaneous calls WCF can accept and thus make most use of your hardware power. By changing ASP.NET process model, you can increase number of concurrent requests that can be served by your website. And finally by turning on IIS caching and dynamic compression, you can dramatically increase the page download speed on browsers and and overall responsiveness of your applications. Read the CodeProject article for more details. http://www.codeproject.com/KB/webservices/quickwins.aspx Please vote for me if you find the article useful.

    Read the article

  • C#: Why Decorate When You Can Intercept

    - by James Michael Hare
    We've all heard of the old Decorator Design Pattern (here) or used it at one time or another either directly or indirectly.  A decorator is a class that wraps a given abstract class or interface and presents the same (or a superset) public interface but "decorated" with additional functionality.   As a really simplistic example, consider the System.IO.BufferedStream, it itself is a descendent of System.IO.Stream and wraps the given stream with buffering logic while still presenting System.IO.Stream's public interface:   1: Stream buffStream = new BufferedStream(rawStream); Now, let's take a look at a custom-code example.  Let's say that we have a class in our data access layer that retrieves a list of products from a database:  1: // a class that handles our CRUD operations for products 2: public class ProductDao 3: { 4: ... 5:  6: // a method that would retrieve all available products 7: public IEnumerable<Product> GetAvailableProducts() 8: { 9: var results = new List<Product>(); 10:  11: // must create the connection 12: using (var con = _factory.CreateConnection()) 13: { 14: con.ConnectionString = _productsConnectionString; 15: con.Open(); 16:  17: // create the command 18: using (var cmd = _factory.CreateCommand()) 19: { 20: cmd.Connection = con; 21: cmd.CommandText = _getAllProductsStoredProc; 22: cmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure; 23:  24: // get a reader and pass back all results 25: using (var reader = cmd.ExecuteReader()) 26: { 27: while(reader.Read()) 28: { 29: results.Add(new Product 30: { 31: Name = reader["product_name"].ToString(), 32: ... 33: }); 34: } 35: } 36: } 37: }            38:  39: return results; 40: } 41: } Yes, you could use EF or any myriad other choices for this sort of thing, but the germaine point is that you have some operation that takes a non-trivial amount of time.  What if, during the production day I notice that my application is performing slowly and I want to see how much of that slowness is in the query versus my code.  Well, I could easily wrap the logic block in a System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch and log the results to log4net or other logging flavor of choice: 1:     // a class that handles our CRUD operations for products 2:     public class ProductDao 3:     { 4:         private static readonly ILog _log = LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(ProductDao)); 5:         ... 6:         7:         // a method that would retrieve all available products 8:         public IEnumerable<Product> GetAvailableProducts() 9:         { 10:             var results = new List<Product>(); 11:             var timer = Stopwatch.StartNew(); 12:             13:             // must create the connection 14:             using (var con = _factory.CreateConnection()) 15:             { 16:                 con.ConnectionString = _productsConnectionString; 17:                 18:                 // and all that other DB code... 19:                 ... 20:             } 21:             22:             timer.Stop(); 23:             24:             if (timer.ElapsedMilliseconds > 5000) 25:             { 26:                 _log.WarnFormat("Long query in GetAvailableProducts() took {0} ms", 27:                     timer.ElapsedMillseconds); 28:             } 29:             30:             return results; 31:         } 32:     } In my eye, this is very ugly.  It violates Single Responsibility Principle (SRP), which says that a class should only ever have one responsibility, where responsibility is often defined as a reason to change.  This class (and in particular this method) has two reasons to change: If the method of retrieving products changes. If the method of logging changes. Well, we could “simplify” this using the Decorator Design Pattern (here).  If we followed the pattern to the letter, we'd need to create a base decorator that implements the DAOs public interface and forwards to the wrapped instance.  So let's assume we break out the ProductDAO interface into IProductDAO using your refactoring tool of choice (Resharper is great for this). Now, ProductDao will implement IProductDao and get rid of all logging logic: 1:     public class ProductDao : IProductDao 2:     { 3:         // this reverts back to original version except for the interface added 4:     } 5:  And we create the base Decorator that also implements the interface and forwards all calls: 1:     public class ProductDaoDecorator : IProductDao 2:     { 3:         private readonly IProductDao _wrappedDao; 4:         5:         // constructor takes the dao to wrap 6:         public ProductDaoDecorator(IProductDao wrappedDao) 7:         { 8:             _wrappedDao = wrappedDao; 9:         } 10:         11:         ... 12:         13:         // and then all methods just forward their calls 14:         public IEnumerable<Product> GetAvailableProducts() 15:         { 16:             return _wrappedDao.GetAvailableProducts(); 17:         } 18:     } This defines our base decorator, then we can create decorators that add items of interest, and for any methods we don't decorate, we'll get the default behavior which just forwards the call to the wrapper in the base decorator: 1:     public class TimedThresholdProductDaoDecorator : ProductDaoDecorator 2:     { 3:         private static readonly ILog _log = LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(TimedThresholdProductDaoDecorator)); 4:         5:         public TimedThresholdProductDaoDecorator(IProductDao wrappedDao) : 6:             base(wrappedDao) 7:         { 8:         } 9:         10:         ... 11:         12:         public IEnumerable<Product> GetAvailableProducts() 13:         { 14:             var timer = Stopwatch.StartNew(); 15:             16:             var results = _wrapped.GetAvailableProducts(); 17:             18:             timer.Stop(); 19:             20:             if (timer.ElapsedMilliseconds > 5000) 21:             { 22:                 _log.WarnFormat("Long query in GetAvailableProducts() took {0} ms", 23:                     timer.ElapsedMillseconds); 24:             } 25:             26:             return results; 27:         } 28:     } Well, it's a bit better.  Now the logging is in its own class, and the database logic is in its own class.  But we've essentially multiplied the number of classes.  We now have 3 classes and one interface!  Now if you want to do that same logging decorating on all your DAOs, imagine the code bloat!  Sure, you can simplify and avoid creating the base decorator, or chuck it all and just inherit directly.  But regardless all of these have the problem of tying the logging logic into the code itself. Enter the Interceptors.  Things like this to me are a perfect example of when it's good to write an Interceptor using your class library of choice.  Sure, you could design your own perfectly generic decorator with delegates and all that, but personally I'm a big fan of Castle's Dynamic Proxy (here) which is actually used by many projects including Moq. What DynamicProxy allows you to do is intercept calls into any object by wrapping it with a proxy on the fly that intercepts the method and allows you to add functionality.  Essentially, the code would now look like this using DynamicProxy: 1: // Note: I like hiding DynamicProxy behind the scenes so users 2: // don't have to explicitly add reference to Castle's libraries. 3: public static class TimeThresholdInterceptor 4: { 5: // Our logging handle 6: private static readonly ILog _log = LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(TimeThresholdInterceptor)); 7:  8: // Handle to Castle's proxy generator 9: private static readonly ProxyGenerator _generator = new ProxyGenerator(); 10:  11: // generic form for those who prefer it 12: public static object Create<TInterface>(object target, TimeSpan threshold) 13: { 14: return Create(typeof(TInterface), target, threshold); 15: } 16:  17: // Form that uses type instead 18: public static object Create(Type interfaceType, object target, TimeSpan threshold) 19: { 20: return _generator.CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(interfaceType, target, 21: new TimedThreshold(threshold, level)); 22: } 23:  24: // The interceptor that is created to intercept the interface calls. 25: // Hidden as a private inner class so not exposing Castle libraries. 26: private class TimedThreshold : IInterceptor 27: { 28: // The threshold as a positive timespan that triggers a log message. 29: private readonly TimeSpan _threshold; 30:  31: // interceptor constructor 32: public TimedThreshold(TimeSpan threshold) 33: { 34: _threshold = threshold; 35: } 36:  37: // Intercept functor for each method invokation 38: public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation) 39: { 40: // time the method invocation 41: var timer = Stopwatch.StartNew(); 42:  43: // the Castle magic that tells the method to go ahead 44: invocation.Proceed(); 45:  46: timer.Stop(); 47:  48: // check if threshold is exceeded 49: if (timer.Elapsed > _threshold) 50: { 51: _log.WarnFormat("Long execution in {0} took {1} ms", 52: invocation.Method.Name, 53: timer.ElapsedMillseconds); 54: } 55: } 56: } 57: } Yes, it's a bit longer, but notice that: This class ONLY deals with logging long method calls, no DAO interface leftovers. This class can be used to time ANY class that has an interface or virtual methods. Personally, I like to wrap and hide the usage of DynamicProxy and IInterceptor so that anyone who uses this class doesn't need to know to add a Castle library reference.  As far as they are concerned, they're using my interceptor.  If I change to a new library if a better one comes along, they're insulated. Now, all we have to do to use this is to tell it to wrap our ProductDao and it does the rest: 1: // wraps a new ProductDao with a timing interceptor with a threshold of 5 seconds 2: IProductDao dao = TimeThresholdInterceptor.Create<IProductDao>(new ProductDao(), 5000); Automatic decoration of all methods!  You can even refine the proxy so that it only intercepts certain methods. This is ideal for so many things.  These are just some of the interceptors we've dreamed up and use: Log parameters and returns of methods to XML for auditing. Block invocations to methods and return default value (stubbing). Throw exception if certain methods are called (good for blocking access to deprecated methods). Log entrance and exit of a method and the duration. Log a message if a method takes more than a given time threshold to execute. Whether you use DynamicProxy or some other technology, I hope you see the benefits this adds.  Does it completely eliminate all need for the Decorator pattern?  No, there may still be cases where you want to decorate a particular class with functionality that doesn't apply to the world at large. But for all those cases where you are using Decorator to add functionality that's truly generic.  I strongly suggest you give this a try!

    Read the article

  • Mocking HttpContext with JustMock

    - by mehfuzh
    In post , i will show a test code that will mock the various elements needed to complete a HTTP page request and  assert the expected page cycle steps. To begin, i have a simple enumeration that has my predefined page steps: public enum PageStep {     PreInit,     Load,     PreRender,     UnLoad } Once doing so, i  first created the page object [not mocking]. Page page = new Page(); Here, our target is to fire up the page process though ProcessRequest call, now if we take a look inside method though reflector, we will find calls stack like : ProcessRequest –> ProcessRequestWithNoAssert –> SetInstrinsics –> Finallly ProcessRequest. Inside SetIntrinsics , where it requires calls from HttpRequest, HttpResponse and HttpBrowserCababilities. With this , we can easily know what are classes / calls  we need to mock in order to get though the expected call. Accordingly, for  HttpBrowserCapabilities our required test code will look like: Mock.Arrange(() => browser.PreferredRenderingMime).Returns("text/html"); Mock.Arrange(() => browser.PreferredResponseEncoding).Returns("UTF-8"); Mock.Arrange(() => browser.PreferredRequestEncoding).Returns("UTF-8"); Now, HttpBrowserCapabilities is get though [Instance]HttpRequest.Browser. Therefore, we create the HttpRequest mock: var request = Mock.Create<HttpRequest>(); Then , add the required get call : Mock.Arrange(() => request.Browser).Returns(browser); As, [instance]Browser.PerferrredResponseEncoding and [instance]Browser.PreferredResponseEncoding  are also set to the request object and to make that they are set properly, we can add the following lines as well [not required though]. bool requestContentEncodingSet = false; Mock.ArrangeSet(() => request.ContentEncoding = Encoding.GetEncoding("UTF-8")).DoInstead(() =>  requestContentEncodingSet = true); Similarly, for response we can write:  var response = Mock.Create<HttpResponse>();    bool responseContentEncodingSet = false;  Mock.ArrangeSet(() => response.ContentEncoding = Encoding.GetEncoding("UTF-8")).DoInstead(() => responseContentEncodingSet = true); Finally , I created a mock of HttpContext and set the Request and Response properties that will returns the mocked version. var context = Mock.Create<HttpContext>();   Mock.Arrange(() => context.Request).Returns(request); Mock.Arrange(() => context.Response).Returns(response); As, Page internally calls RenderControl method , we just need to replace that with our one and optionally we can check if  invoked properly: bool rendered = false; Mock.Arrange(() => page.RenderControl(Arg.Any<HtmlTextWriter>())).DoInstead(() => rendered = true); That’s  it, the rest of the code is simple,  where  i asserted the page cycle with the PageSteps that i defined earlier: var pageSteps = new Queue<PageStep>();    page.PreInit +=      delegate      {          pageSteps.Enqueue(PageStep.PreInit);      };  page.Load +=      delegate      {          pageSteps.Enqueue(PageStep.Load);      };    page.PreRender +=      delegate      {          pageSteps.Enqueue(PageStep.PreRender);      };    page.Unload +=      delegate      {          pageSteps.Enqueue(PageStep.UnLoad);      };    page.ProcessRequest(context);    Assert.True(requestContentEncodingSet);  Assert.True(responseContentEncodingSet);  Assert.True(rendered);    Assert.Equal(pageSteps.Dequeue(), PageStep.PreInit);  Assert.Equal(pageSteps.Dequeue(), PageStep.Load);  Assert.Equal(pageSteps.Dequeue(), PageStep.PreRender);  Assert.Equal(pageSteps.Dequeue(), PageStep.UnLoad);    Mock.Assert(request);  Mock.Assert(response);   You can get the test class shown in this post here to give a try by yourself with of course JustMock. Enjoy!!

    Read the article

  • How much PHP do I need to know to use AJAX?

    - by user1146440
    Hi I am interested in learning to create AJAX calls with Javascript.I already know Javascript and I would like to learn PHP at some point but at the moment I know nothing about it and I don't have the time to learn the full language. How much PHP do I need to know to be able to do AJAX calls? Can someone recommend me some good resources to get familiar with what I need to learn from PHP so I can learn AJAX.I am planing on starting to read AJAX and PHP: Building Modern Web Applications 2nd Edition but I think I need to know some basic PHP.

    Read the article

  • What are the alternatives to "overriding a method" when using composition instead of inheritance?

    - by Sebastien Diot
    If we should favor composition over inheritance, the data part of it is clear, at least for me. What I don't have a clear solution to is how overwriting methods, or simply implementing them if they are defined in a pure virtual form, should be implemented. An obvious way is to wrap the instance representing the base-class into the instance representing the sub-class. But the major downsides of this are that if you have say 10 methods, and you want to override a single one, you still have to delegate every other methods anyway. And if there were several layers of inheritance, you have now several layers of wrapping, which becomes less and less efficient. Also, this only solve the problem of the object "client"; when another object calls the top wrapper, things happen like in inheritance. But when a method of the deepest instance, the base class, calls it's own methods that have been wrapped and modified, the wrapping has no effect: the call is performed by it's own method, instead of by the highest wrapper. One extreme alternative that would solve those problems would be to have one instance per method. You only wrap methods that you want to overwrite, so there is no pointless delegation. But now you end up with an incredible amount of classes and object instance, which will have a negative effect on memory usage, and this will require a lot more coding too. So, are there alternatives (preferably alternatives that can be used in Java), that: Do not result in many levels of pointless delegation without any changes. Make sure that not only the client of an object, but also all the code of the object itself, is aware of which implementation of method should be called. Does not result in an explosion of classes and instances. Ideally puts the extra memory overhead that is required at the "class"/"particular composition" level (static if you will), rather than having every object pay the memory overhead of composition. My feeling tells me that the instance representing the base class should be at the "top" of the stack/layers so it receives calls directly, and can process them directly too if they are not overwritten. But I don't know how to do it that way.

    Read the article

  • Sending email notifications to users

    - by Web Girl
    What is the preferable way to send email notifications to users? I can do it both ways but what is better? have some c# code that calls stored procedure in the database. Stored procedure based on some logic pulls all the emails data and sends email using database mail or c# code calls stored procedure, gets all the nesessary data back and sends email itself using smtp server etc. I just wonder what is the preferable way in the sense of performance etc... C# code is a library that would be a part of the web application. So it's where it's better to put the load, on the application server or the database server? System will not be crazy busy, it's not like Amazon or something. But still it would be nice to create something that makes sense.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >