Search Results

Search found 108959 results on 4359 pages for 'ado net data services'.

Page 366/4359 | < Previous Page | 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373  | Next Page >

  • Managed Service Architectures Part I

    - by barryoreilly
    Instead of thinking about service oriented architecture, a concept that is continually defined, redefined, abused and mistreated, perhaps it is time to drop the acronym and consider what we actually need to get the job done.   ‘Pure’ SOA involves the modeling of an organisation’s processes, the so called ‘Top Down’ approach, followed by the implementation of these processes as services.     Another approach, more commonly seen in the wild, is the bottom up approach. This usually involves services that simply start popping up in the organization, and SOA in this case is often just an attempt to rein in these services. Such projects, although described as SOA projects for a variety of reasons, have clearly little relation to process driven architecture. Much has been written about these two approaches, with many deciding that a hybrid of both methods is needed to succeed with SOA.   These hybrid methods are a sensible compromise, but one gets the feeling that there is too much focus on ‘Succeeding with SOA’. Organisations who focus too much on bottom up development, or who waste too much time and money on top down approaches that don’t produce results, are often recommended to attempt an ‘agile’(Erl) or ‘middle-out’ (Microsoft) approach in order to succeed with SOA.  The problem with recommending this approach is that, in most cases, succeeding with SOA isn’t the aim of the project. If a project is started with the simple aim of ‘Succeeding with SOA’ then the reasons for the projects existence probably need to be questioned.   There are a number of things we can be sure of: ·         An organisation will have a number of disparate IT systems ·         Some of these systems will have redundant data and functionality ·         Integration will give considerable ROI ·         Integration will already be under way. ·         Services will already exist in the organisation ·         These services will be inconsistent in their implementation and in their governance   So there are three goals here: 1.       Alignment between the business and IT 2.     Integration of disparate systems 3.     Management of services.   2 and 3 are going to happen,  in fact they must happen if any degree of return is expected from the IT department. Ignoring 1 is considered a typical mistake in SOA implementations, as it ignores the business implications. However, the business implication of this approach is the money saved in more efficient IT processes. 2 and 3 are ongoing, and they will continue happening, even if a large project to produce a SOA metamodel is started. The result will then be an unstructured cackle of services, and a metamodel that is already going out of date. So we get stuck in and rebuild our services so that they match the metamodel, with the far reaching consequences that this will have on all our LOB systems are current. Lets imagine that this actually works ( how often do we rip and replace working software because it doesn't fit a certain pattern? Never -that's the point of integration), we will now be working with a metamodel that is out of date, and most likely incomplete if the organisation is large.      Accepting that an object can have more than one model over time, with perhaps more than one model being  at any given time will help us realise the limitations of the top down model. It is entirely normal , and perhaps necessary, for an organisation to be able to view an entity from different perspectives.   So, instead of trying to constantly force these goals in a straight line, why not let them happen in parallel, and manage the changes in each layer.     If  company A has chosen to model their business processes and create a business architecture, there will be a reason behind this. Often the aim is to make the business more flexible and able to cope with change, through alignment between the business and the IT department.   If company B’s IT department recognizes the problem of wild services springing up everywhere, and decides to do something about it, by designing a platform and processes for the introduction of services, is this not a valid approach?   With the hybrid approach, it is recommended that company A begin deploying services as quickly as possible. Based on models that are clearly incomplete, and which will therefore change rapidly and often in the near future. Natural business evolution will also mean that the models can be guaranteed to change in the not so near future. To ‘Succeed with SOA’ Company B needs to go back to the drawing board and start modeling processes and objects. So, in effect, we are telling business analysts to start developing code based on a model they are unsure of, and telling programmers to ignore the obvious and growing problems in their IT department and start drawing lines and boxes.     Could the problem be that there are two different problem domains? And the whole concept of SOA as it being described by clever salespeople today creates an example of oft dreaded ‘tight coupling’ between these two domains?   Could it be that we have taken two large problem areas, and bundled the solution together in order to create a magic bullet? And then convinced ourselves that the bullet actually exists?   Company A wants to have a closer relationship between the business and its IT department, in order to become a more flexible organization. Company B wants to decrease the maintenance costs of its IT infrastructure. If both companies focus on succeeding with SOA, then they aren’t focusing on their actual goals.   If Company A starts building services from incomplete models, without a gameplan, they will end up in the same situation as company B, with wild services. If company B focuses on modeling, they could easily end up with the same problems as company A.   Now we have two companies, who a short while ago had one problem each, that now have two problems each. This has happened because of a focus on ‘Succeeding with SOA’, rather than solving the problem at hand.   This is not to suggest that the two problem domains are unrelated, a strategy that encompasses both will obviously be good for the organization. But only if the organization realizes this and can develop such a strategy. This strategy cannot be bought in a box.       Anyone who has worked with SOA for a while will be used to analyzing the solutions to a problem and judging the solution’s level of coupling. If we have two applications that each perform separate functions, but need to communicate with each other, we create a integration layer between them, perhaps with a service, but we do all we can to reduce the dependency between the two systems. Using the same approach, we can separate the modeling (business architecture) and the service hosting (technical architecture).     The business architecture describes the processes and business objects in the business domain.   The technical architecture describes the hosting and management and implementation of services.   The glue that binds these together, the integration layer in our analogy, is the service contract, where the operations map the processes to their technical implementation, and the messages map business concepts to software objects in the implementation.   If we reduce the coupling between these layers, we should be able to allow developers to develop services, and business analysts to develop models, without the changes rippling through from one side to the other.   This would allow company A to carry on modeling, and company B to develop a service platform, each achieving their intended goal, without necessarily creating the problems seen in pure top down or bottom up approaches. Company B could then at a later date map their service infrastructure to a unified model, and company A could carry on modeling, insulating deployed services from changes in the ongoing modeling.   How do we do this?  The concept of service virtualization has been around for a while, and is instantly realizable in Microsoft’s Managed Services Engine. Here we can create a layer of virtual services, which represent the business analyst’s view, presenting uniform contracts to the outside world. These services can then transform and route messages to the actual service implementations. I like to think of the virtual services with their beautifully modeled interfaces as ‘SOA services’, and the implementations as simple integration ‘adapter’ services providing an interface to a technical implementation. The Managed Services Engine also provides policy based control over services, regardless of where they are deployed, simplifying handling of security, logging, exception handling etc.   This solves a big problem. The pressure to deliver services quickly is always there in projects. It is very important to quickly show value when implementing service architectures. There is also pressure to deliver quality, and you can’t easily do both at the same time. This approach allows quick delivery with quality increasing over time, allowing modeling and service development to occur in parallel and independent of each other. The link between business modeling and service implementation is not one that is obvious to many organizations, and requires a certain maturity to realize and drive forward. It is also completely possible that a company can benefit from one without the other, even if this approach is frowned upon today, there are many companies doing so and seeing ROI.   Of course there are disadvantages to this. The biggest one being the transformations necessary between the virtual interfaces and the service implementations. Bad choices in developing the services in the service implementation could mean that it is impossible to map the modeled processes to the implementation with redevelopment of the service. In many cases the architect will not have a choice here anyway, as proprietary systems are often delivered with predeveloped services. The alternative is to wait until the model is finished and then build the service according the model. However, if that approach worked we wouldn’t be having this discussion! And even when it does work, natural business evolution will mean that the two concepts (model and implementation) will immediately start to drift away from each other, so coupling them tightly together so that they are forever bound to the model that only applies at the time of the modeling work will not really achieve a great deal. Architecture is all about trade offs, and here a choice has to be made. The choice is between something will initially be of low quality but will work, or something that may well be impossible to achieve in most situations.         In conclusion, top-down is a natural approach for business analysts, and bottom-up  is a natural approach for developers. Instead of trying to force something on both that neither want, and which has not shown itself to be successful,  why not let them get on with their jobs, and let an enterprise architect coordinate the processes?

    Read the article

  • Oracle Coherence w/ ASP.NET application

    - by frankadelic
    Is it possible to use Oracle Coherence to provide distributed caching to an ASP.NET application? We would like to use Coherence to scale out an ASP.NET application which does not have distributed caching. Alternatives would be memcached, etc. However, we are considering Coherence since we already have licensing/expertise in that area.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET GridView Sort?

    - by Curtis White
    I'm performing a query with a sort in the Selecting event of the LinqDataSource. I'm then casting my query to a list and assigning it to the result. I'm using this data source in an ASP.NET gridview. I can see the list is sorted but when the ASP.NET gridview does not seem to be respecting the sort order. How can I get the gridview to respect my default sort order?

    Read the article

  • Equivalent of http://www.cplusplus.com/ for C# .net

    - by David Relihan
    Hi Folks I've read through a lot of the "Learn C# .Net" questions just to see if this question was answered already (directly or indirectly). I program mostly in C++ so I find the website http://www.cplusplus.com/ invaluable and there's rarely a day when it is not open in my browser! However, I'm just wondering is there an C# .Net equivalent that people find themselves constantly referencing? The best I'm aware of is: http://stackoverflow.com http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vcsharp/aa336809.aspx http://www.java2s.com/Tutorial/CSharp/CatalogCSharp.htm Thanks,

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Binding - Duplicated Messages

    - by Rodrigo Gama
    I'm using ASP.NET MVC Binding Framework. Let's say I have a class Item, that has a mandatory field Id. I am binding a List, and do not want one error message for each element in this list. If more then one error happen when binding the Id field, I want only one message to be added to ModelState and shown to the user. In one sentence: Is there a way to avoid duplicated messages using ASP.NET MVC Binding Framework?

    Read the article

  • Multithreading in .NET 4

    - by Artiom Chilaru
    I have heard that the .NET 4 team has added new classes in the framework that make working with threads better and easier. Basically the question is what are the new ways to run multithreaded tasks added in .NET 4 and what are they designed to be used for?

    Read the article

  • File uploading in asp.net permission error (Access denied to path x)

    - by Arash
    I'm trying to upload some image files in my asp.net web app. Server OS: Windows server 2003 and IIS 6 I granted write permission in IIS to root and destination folder and granted FullControl Access to this users IUSer_Mashinname, Asp.net user, network services,Everyone, and all other users to the web app root folder and upload destination folder, but there is "Access denied problem".

    Read the article

  • ASP.net feedback form

    - by c11ada
    hey all, i want to implement a sort of feedback form/survey form in asp.net which is linked to a database. can any one help on any good tutorials or articles i want to create a asp.net application which will take questions from a database then display them on the form. once the user has finished the survey the results will be stored into the database. can any one help me !!

    Read the article

  • DotNetOpenAuth oAuth in ASP.NET MVC

    - by nikmd23
    I'm trying to understand how to apply the oAuth consumer library from DotNetOpenAuth in the context of ASP.NET MVC. oAuth is new to me, and the library doesn't seem very simple. Does anyone have a sample of leveraging this library, for this usage, in ASP.NET MVC?

    Read the article

  • Selling upper management on converting to ASP.net from Classic ASP

    - by Tarzan
    A client of mine has an application written in Classic ASP and COM+. The managers are interested in migrating it to ASP.net MVC but they have to convince the CIO that it is a good move. The old app still works OK, other than the fact that no one at the company can maintain it. How can we sell upper management on converting to ASP.net from Classic ASP? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Installer

    - by DanyW
    Hi everyone, We need to install ASP.NET MVC on several developers machines with VS2010. Unfortunately the only files I can find in the Microsoft Download Center are labelled as ASP.NET MVC installer for VS2008. Can someone please point me in the direction of installer for VS2010, or can the VS2008 one also work for VS2010? Thanks, Dany.

    Read the article

  • Pass encrypted querystring between php and asp.net (c#)

    - by Paul
    I need to pass a single variable in a querystring from one application (in PHP) to another (in ASP.NET). It's a one way transfer...That is I need to encrypt it in PHP and decrypt it in ASP.NET (c#). I'm barely a newbie on PHP and I'd like not to have to do more than add a tag to the page that needs to do the passing. The data will be anywhere from 5 - 15 characters..only letters and numbers. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to dispose of a NET COM interop object on Release()

    - by mhenry1384
    I have a COM object written in managed code (C++/CLI). I am using that object in standard C++. How do I force my COM object's destructor to be called immediately when the COM object is released? If that's not possible, call I have Release() call a MyDispose() method on my COM object? My code to declare the object (C++/CLI): [Guid("57ED5388-blahblah")] [InterfaceType(ComInterfaceType::InterfaceIsIDispatch)] [ComVisible(true)] public interface class IFoo { void Doit(); }; [Guid("417E5293-blahblah")] [ClassInterface(ClassInterfaceType::None)] [ComVisible(true)] public ref class Foo : IFoo { public: void MyDispose(); ~Foo() {MyDispose();} // This is never called !Foo() {MyDispose();} // This is called by the garbage collector. virtual ULONG Release() {MyDispose();} // This is never called virtual void Doit(); }; My code to use the object (native C++): #import "..\\Debug\\Foo.tlb" ... Bar::IFoo setup(__uuidof(Bar::Foo)); // This object comes from the .tlb. setup.Doit(); setup-Release(); // explicit release, not really necessary since Bar::IFoo's destructor will call Release(). If I put a destructor method on my COM object, it is never called. If I put a finalizer method, it is called when the garbage collector gets around to it. If I explicitly call my Release() override it is never called. I would really like it so that when my native Bar::IFoo object goes out of scope it automatically calls my .NET object's dispose code. I would think I could do it by overriding the Release(), and if the object count = 0 then call MyDispose(). But apparently I'm not overriding Release() correctly because my Release() method is never called. Obviously, I can make this happen by putting my MyDispose() method in the interface and requiring the people using my object to call MyDispose() before Release(), but it would be slicker if Release() just cleaned up the object. Is it possible to force the .NET COM object's destructor, or some other method, to be called immediately when a COM object is released? Googling on this issue gets me a lot of hits telling me to call System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.ReleaseComObject(), but of course, that's how you tell .NET to release a COM object. I want COM Release() to Dispose of a .NET object.

    Read the article

  • How to speed up 'cold start' of .NET component called from VB6 app

    - by Craig Johnston
    I have a VB6 app which brings up a form by invoking a .NET DLL, but the problem is that this form takes almost 5 seconds to appear after a menu item in the VB6 app is selected. How can I speed this up? I'm thinking that one possible solution is to load the Form from the .NET DLL during the splash screen of the VB6 app but make invisible or somehow not show it, and then when the menu item is selected I will make it show or visible. What are my options?

    Read the article

  • Generating Deep Arrays: Shallow to Deep, Deep to Shallow or Bad idea?

    - by MobyD
    I'm working on an array structure that will be used as the data source for a report template in a web app. The data comes from relatively complex SQL queries that return one or many rows as one dimensional associative arrays. In the case of many, they are turned into two dimensional indexed array. The data is complex and in some cases there is a lot of it. To save trips to the database (which are extremely expensive in this scenario) I'm attempting to get all of the basic arrays (1 and 2 dimension raw database data) and put them, conditionally, into a single, five level deep array. Organizing the data in PHP seems like a better idea than by using where statements in the SQL. Array Structure Array of years( year => array of types( types => array of information( total => value, table => array of data( index => db array ) ) ) ) My first question is, is this a bad idea. Are arrays like this appropriate for this situation? If this would work, how should I go about populating it? My initial thought was shallow to deep, but the more I work on this, the more I realize that it'd be very difficult to abstract out the conditionals that determine where each item goes in the array. So it seems that starting from the most deeply nested data may be the approach I should take. If this is array abuse, what alternatives exist?

    Read the article

  • ASP .NET AJAX UI stuff

    - by Prashant
    Hi, I had been working on server side(c#) for a couple of years. But now I have been put on the UI stuff. I know ASP.NET in detail. But the landscape in UI stuff has changed dramatically from last 2 years. Everyone talks about jquery, json, asp .net ajax extender. I don't know how to cope up with this. Any thoughts on how I could come up to speed ?

    Read the article

  • Cannot create the Silverlight ASP.NET website in Visual Studio 2008 Web Developer edition

    - by BALAMURUGAN
    I need to create a ASp.net website with silverlight controls. I am having only express editions of 2008 (Web developer edition and C# express editions). I have created the WPF application sing C# expression and create the new XAML files. Then I have created asp.net website in web developer edition and linked the xaml files with the . But nothing works. Note: I have not silverlight application project types and templates in Visual Studio 2008 web developer edition.

    Read the article

  • Using Perfmon with MySQL Connector/NET

    - by Mark Richman
    I am trying to diagnose repeated lock wait timeouts from my ASP.NET app to MySQL 5.1. I'm using MySQL Connector/NET 6.2.3. I don't see anything MySQL-related in Perfmon's Performance Object dropdown list. What else can I do to try to diagnose these issues?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373  | Next Page >