Search Results

Search found 859 results on 35 pages for 'versus'.

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 4/35 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Element Content Versus Attribute for Simple XML Value

    - by MB
    I know the elements versus attributes debate has come up many times here and elsewhere (e.g. here, here, here, here, and here) but I haven't seen much discussion of elements versus attributes for simple property values. So which of the following approaches do you think is better for storing a simple value? A: Value in Element Content: <TotalCount>553</TotalCount> <CelsiusTemperature>23.5</CelsiusTemperature> <SingleDayPeriod>2010-05-29</SingleDayPeriod> <ZipCodeLocation>12203</ZipCodeLocation> or B: Value in Attribute: <TotalCount value="553"/> <CelsiusTemperature value="23.5"/> <SingleDayPeriod day="2010-05-29"/> <ZipCodeLocation code="12203"/> I suspect that putting the value in the element content (A) might look a little more familiar to most folks (though I'm not sure about that). Putting the value in an attribute (B) might use less characters, but that depends on the length of the element and attribute names. Putting the value in an attribute (B) might be more extensible, because you could potentially include all sorts of extra information as nested elements. Whereas, by putting the value inside the element content (A), you're restricting extensibility to adding more attributes. But then extensibility often isn't a concern for really simple properties - sometimes you know that you'll never need to add additional data. Bottom line might be that it simply doesn't matter, but it would still be great to hear some thoughts and see some votes for the two options.

    Read the article

  • ArrayCollection versus Vector Objects in FLEX

    - by Vetsin
    Can anyone tell me the applicable differences between an ArrayCollection and a Vector in flex? I'm unsure if I should be using one over the other. I saw that Vector is type safe and that makes me feel better, but are there disadvantages? public var ac:ArrayCollection = new ArrayCollection(); versus public var vec:Vector.<String> = new Vector.<String>(); Thanks.

    Read the article

  • [NUnit+Moq] Guidelines for using Assert versus Verify

    - by emddudley
    I'm new to unit testing, and I'm learning how to use NUnit and Moq. NUnit provides Assert syntax for testing conditions in my unit tests, while Moq provides some Verify functions. To some extent these seem to provide the same functionality. How do I know when it's more appropriate to use Assert or Verify? Maybe Assert is better for confirming state, and Verify is better for confirming behavior (Classical versus Mockist)?

    Read the article

  • SCOM 2007 versus Zenoss (or other open source)

    - by TheCleaner
    I've taken the liberty to test both SCOM 2007 and Zenoss and found the following: SCOM 2007 Pros: Great MS Windows server monitoring and reporting In-depth configuration and easily integrates into a "MS datacenter" Cons: limited network device monitoring support (without 3rd party plugins) expensive difficult learning curve Zenoss Pros: Open Source (free) decent server monitoring for Windows, great monitoring for Linux decent network device monitoring Cons: not as in-depth as SCOM (for Windows at least) So my question to you folks is this: Given the above, and given that I'm trying to monitor 55 Windows servers, 1 Linux server, 2 ESX servers, and Juniper equipment...which would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Enabling Hyper-V Integrated Services Time Sync Services versus Internet Time Synchronization

    - by cpuguru
    Should I deselect the "Synchronize with an Internet Time Server" checkbox under the VM's "Date and Time - Internet Time Settings" tab if the "Time Synchronization Service" for a Hyper-V-based Virtual Machine is enabled? One of the Integration Services that Hyper-V provides is the Time Synchronization Service, which can be enabled/disabled by going to a VM's Settings-Integration Services setting in the Management section. I believe this is checked by default. When you install a Windows Server 2008 OS in a VM on the Hyper-V server, it comes with the "Synchronize with an Internet Time Server" option set, pointing to "time.windows.com". I'd think that if the parent Hyper-V server is set to one time server, and the child VM is pointing to a different time server, there would be a momentary blip if the two are not spot on with their times when the synchronization services run. So the question is, which time sync service should I use? I'm assuming not both. And what is the advantage of one over the other? Note: This question assumes that the machines are not joined to a domain. If they were, the machines would also try to update their time against the domain controller with the primary domain controller role too, right? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • GPO best practices : Security-Group Filtering Versus OU

    - by Olivier Rochaix
    Good afternoon everyone, I'm quite new to Active Directory stuff. After upgraded Functional level of our AD from 2003 to 2008 R2 (I need it to put fine-grained password policy), I then start to reorganized my OUs. I keep in mind that a good OU organization facilitate application of GPO (and maybe GPP).But in the end, it feels more natural for me to use Security-group filtering (from Scope tab) to apply my policies, instead of direct OU. Do you think it is a good practice or should I stick to OU ? We are a small organisation with 20 users and 30-35 computers. So, we got a simple OU tree, but more subtle split with security-groups. The OU tree doesn't contain any objects except at the bottom level. Each bottom level OU contains Computers,Users, and of course security groups. These security groups contains Users & Computers of the same OU. Thanks for your advices, Olivier

    Read the article

  • Bash wonkyness on Ubuntu versus RHEL

    - by d34dh0r53
    Fellow faulters, I'm playing around with a one liner that I've developed on a RHEL 5.4 box and I have it working perfectly: TOTAL_RAM=`free | grep Mem: | awk '{ print $2 }'`; \ ps axo rss,comm,pid | awk -v total_ram=$TOTAL_RAM \ '{ proc_list[$2] += $1; } END { for (proc in proc_list) \ { proc_pct = (proc_list[proc]/total_ram)*100; printf("%d\t%s\t%0.2f%\n", proc_list[proc],proc,proc_pct); }}' \ | sort -n | tail -n 10 Which outputs something like the following on my RHEL box: 3736 logmon 0.01% 4156 EvMgrC 0.01% 4692 hald 0.01% 5020 ntpd 0.02% 6252 sshd 0.02% 7784 cvd 0.02% 9224 snmpd 0.03% 13068 dsm_sa_datamgr3 0.04% 23320 dsm_om_connsvc3 0.07% 4249864 mysqld 12.90% However on my Ubuntu 9.04 slice I get this: awk: run time error: not enough arguments passed to printf("%d %s %0.2f% ") FILENAME="-" FNR=104 NR=104 33248 console-kit-dae 3.17 I think it has to be bash that is borking something, but I'm really not doing anything that should be that bash specific. The RHEL box is running: # yum info bash | grep -e Version -e Release Version : 3.2 Release : 24.el5 And the Ubuntu box: # apt-cache show bash | grep -e Version Version: 3.2-5ubuntu1 I haven't dug into this super deeply, and thought I'd ping my fellow johnnys to see if you've ever run across this before. /bow

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 Request Filtering logs versus UrlScan 3.1

    - by Mouffette
    When IIS 7.5 Request Filtering blocks a request it seems to add an entry into the regular IIS web logs with a 404. a) Is there any way to send the detailed Request Filtering logs to a separate file? UrlScan could specify LoggingDirectory and keep this "noise" out of our real IIS logs b) Also, is there a way to get more information that Request Filtering blocked a request? UrlScan logged the rule that caused the denial as well as control over a redirection using RejectResponseUrl which was especially convenient in non-production sites. c) If these features are important is the recommended practice to still install UrlScan 3.1 on IIS 7.5 (Windows 2008 R2) and disable Request Filtering? Any guidance is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Liferay Portal versus Google Sites

    - by MikeG
    I am about to start a portal project, and was considering Liferay as the base platform. However, I just learned about Google Sites and I am impressed on its capabilities. Anyone has an experience on substituting his intranet with Google Sites? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Puppet nodes cant' find master, ec2 public versus internal ip addresses and hosts files

    - by Blankman
    If I setup my hosts files such that they reference all other ec2 nodes using the internal ip addresses, will this work or do I have to use the external ip addresses? Do I need to specify anything in my security group to get internal ip addresses to work? e.g. /etc/hosts ip-10-11-12-13.internal some_node_name If I do this, can I reference some_node_name anywhere in my scripts where I would have used the ip address previously? On my puppet agent servers, I have a reference to my puppet master like: public-ip-here puppet When I reboot my puppet agent's, syslog shows they couldn't find the master with the message: getaddinfo : name or service not known I did get it to work by updating /etc/default/puppet and I added to the options: --server=public-ip-here From what I read, puppet will by default try using 'puppet', and I set this in my hosts file so why wouldn't it be picking this up?

    Read the article

  • Software mirroring (RAID1) versus "Fake Raid" for new Windows 7 install

    - by kquinn
    I've just ordered two new hard drives for my main desktop and a copy of Windows 7 Professional 64-bit. I'd like to do a clean install of Win7 onto the new drives (leaving my old XP Pro boot partition around for a while in case something goes disastrously wrong, etc.). I want to have them set up in mirrored (RAID-1) mode. My understanding is that Win7 Pro can do software mirroring, but can I set this up directly at install time? If so, how? Note that I'd like the disk to be split into three partitions (OS/Apps&Data/Bulk data), all of which should be mirrored. Would it be better (more reliable or faster) to use my motherboard's hardware RAID support? My motherboard is an older nVidia nForce 680i SLI, which is not the most stable of motherboards, and I'm not sure how trustworthy its RAID1 configuration might be (or if Win7 could even detect and install onto a hardware-mirrored volume). Also, the performance characteristics of RAID1 are rather different than RAID0 or RAID5, and I'm wondering if Win7's software mirroring might actually be faster than hardware RAID1 (for example, I'm more of a Unix admin when I have to wear the sysadmin hat, and I've had great success deploying ZFS; most hardware RAID1 implementations have to read both disks and compare results to look for data errors, but ZFS can read from only one disk in the mirror and just use the built-in checksum, meaning it can have up to 2x the number of reads in-flight, as long as there's no data corruption). Edit: Okay, my question about whether Windows 7 can do software mirroring has been answered, and it can. I'm still unsure whether Windows software RAID or my motherboard's hardware "fake RAID" function is a better choice, though. Remember, I'm only interested in mirroring -- not the more complicated striping or parity operations that generally show the poor performance of crappy motherboard RAID solutions.

    Read the article

  • Spiceworks versus Request Tracker?

    - by dmackey
    We currently utilize Request Tracker for help desk ticketing, we utilize Spiceworks for asset inventorying. I am pondering whether it might be worthwhile to move from RT to Spiceworks for help desk as well. Has anyone used both systems and can provide some insight into any benefits/problems with either system? Or has general philosophical reasons why one should use one solution over the other? Of course, RT is open source and Spiceworks is not - and usually this would be a major item for me - but since Spiceworks is free and takes community involvement fairly actively its not as major of a concern for me (personally).

    Read the article

  • Terminology: Bounce versus restart

    - by Steve Kuo
    I've always heard and used the term "reboot" or "restart" to indicate restarting a server, service or software module. "reboot the server" "restart Tomcat" "restart the XYZ service" Does "bounce" mean something different or is it just a duplicate term for restart? How is "bounce" any different than restart or reboot?

    Read the article

  • jenkins 1.417 versus Active Directory

    - by bmargulies
    I have a brand new installation of Jenkins 1.417 on Ubuntu 11.6, trying to talk to an active directory. I have the Active Directory plugin installed. If I leave off the base DN and password, the 'test' button claims success, while actual authentication fails. If I put in a user name and password on the domain, the test button fails (just as above). Is there some tweak required to the AD configuration to allow something like Jenkins to talk to it?

    Read the article

  • ZFS: RAIDZ versus stripe with ditto blocks

    - by RandomInsano
    I'm going to build a ZFS file server from FreeBSD. I learned recently that I can't expand a RAIDZ udev once it's part of the pool. That's a problem since I'm a home user and will probably add one disk a year tops. But what if I set copies=3 against my entire pool and just throw individual drives into the pool separated? I've read somewheres that the copies will try and distribute across drives if possible. Is there a guarantee there? I really just want protection from bit rot and drive failure on the cheap. Speed's not an issue since it'll go over a 1Gb network and at MOST stream 720p podcasts. Would my data be guaranteed safe from a single drive failure? Are there things I'm not considering? Any and all input is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 IIS 7.0 HTTP to HTTPS Redirect -- Versus IIS 6.0 Mechanism

    - by Dan7el
    This topic, creating a mechanism for redirection from HTTP to HTTPS on a Windows 2008 server running IIS 7.0 is a much written-about topic on the Internet. How this is done is really not so much my issue. My issue is more of explaining why this can't be done with the standard HTTP Redirect module that ships with Windows 2008 IIS 7.0. Instead, there are other methods needed that are more arduous. First, the IIS 6.0 method requires no externally available modules nor does it require any additional modifications to the web.config or any type of other development effort. It's outlined here: http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/dorr/archive/2009/01/13/how-to-force-redirection-from-http-to-https-on-iis-6-0.aspx And, you can see the basic steps are to run the snap-in, get the properties on the site, and do some modifications. Presto, you have the HTTP -- HTTP redirect setup. Now, on the IIS 7.0 platform, it doesn't seem this simple. An initial search found the following site: http://www.sslshopper.com/iis7-redirect-http-to-https.html Which has two separate approcates: 1. Involves installing a separately available Microsoft module -- URL Rewrite Module, and then adding XML to the web.config. 2. Custom Error Page. ...there might be other methods, but these are the basic ones and the first is listed as the primary method. But wait...There exists on the IIS 7.0 an HTTP Redirect Module. So...why can't I use the HTTP Redirect Module to do this very thing? This is really my big question. I need to know this because my management is going to insist I use the HTTP Redirect Module and set up the HTTP to HTTPS redirect in a similar fashion to how we do in IIS 6.0. Can someone please explain to me, in clean, simple, easy to understand, terms that both I and my management can understand as to why I need to go get the URL Rewrite Module and install that on the server and make the web.config changes suggested by the article instead of simply using the HTTP Redirect module that's already installed on the site? Thanks a bunch.

    Read the article

  • Understanding tcptraceroute versus http response

    - by kojiro
    I'm debugging a web server that has a very high wait time before responding. The server itself is quite fast and has no load, so I strongly suspect a network problem. Basically, I make a web request: wget -O/dev/null http://hostname/ --2013-10-18 11:03:08-- http://hostname/ Resolving hostname... 10.9.211.129 Connecting to hostname|10.9.211.129|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: unspecified [text/html] Saving to: ‘/dev/null’ 2013-10-18 11:04:11 (88.0 KB/s) - ‘/dev/null’ saved [13641] So you see it took about a minute to give me the page, but it does give it to me with a 200 response. So I try a tcptraceroute to see what's up: $ sudo tcptraceroute hostname 80 Password: Selected device en2, address 192.168.113.74, port 54699 for outgoing packets Tracing the path to hostname (10.9.211.129) on TCP port 80 (http), 30 hops max 1 192.168.113.1 0.842 ms 2.216 ms 2.130 ms 2 10.141.12.77 0.707 ms 0.767 ms 0.738 ms 3 10.141.12.33 1.227 ms 1.012 ms 1.120 ms 4 10.141.3.107 0.372 ms 0.305 ms 0.368 ms 5 12.112.4.41 6.688 ms 6.514 ms 6.467 ms 6 cr84.phlpa.ip.att.net (12.122.107.214) 19.892 ms 18.814 ms 15.804 ms 7 cr2.phlpa.ip.att.net (12.122.107.117) 17.554 ms 15.693 ms 16.122 ms 8 cr1.wswdc.ip.att.net (12.122.4.54) 15.838 ms 15.353 ms 15.511 ms 9 cr83.wswdc.ip.att.net (12.123.10.110) 17.451 ms 15.183 ms 16.198 ms 10 12.84.5.93 9.982 ms 9.817 ms 9.784 ms 11 12.84.5.94 14.587 ms 14.301 ms 14.238 ms 12 10.141.3.209 13.870 ms 13.845 ms 13.696 ms 13 * * * … 30 * * * I tried it again with 100 hops, just to be sure – the packets never get there. So how is it that the server does respond to requests via http, even after a minute? Shouldn't all requests just die? I'm not sure how to proceed debugging why this server is slow (as opposed to why it responds at all).

    Read the article

  • Immersed versus 'normal' version of chrome

    - by Nanne
    I installed chrome, and now I have 2 ways to open chrome: if I open chrome from the metro-tile menu, I get the full-screen, immersed, windows-8 style chrome. If I start the link I got on my desktop, I get the windowed version. Apart from the fact that I would like to know how I might do that on purpose, I also want to know what's going on so I can use the windowed version (I prefer that for a browser) from all links I have, especially the one in the menu.

    Read the article

  • Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 versus AMD Athlon II X2 3GHZ

    - by Billy ONeal
    Hello :) I have an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.4GHZ) in my current desktop, and I have a newer machine with an AMD Athlon II X2 3.0GHZ. I'm wondering how the systems will perform in comparison to one another. I'd like to use the AMD because it's 45nm and uses less power, but I don't want to do so at a loss in perforamnce. Which should perform better? Billy3

    Read the article

  • when to upgrade server to include more cores, versus more processors, versus additional server?

    - by gkdsp
    The server hosting market is separated into single, double, qual, etc., processors, where each processor has several cores, or CPUs. My company will offer a Linux-based web application that relies on an Apache web server and a middle tier for business logic. The middle tier is used to crunch math, and return result to a client. Many clients may access the application simultaneously. The company will start with one processor having 4 cores. I'm trying to understand how the app uses the cores and then how to scale the application as business grows, in terms of servers/processors/cores. For example, I'd assume initially one core would be used for Apache, and the other 3 used to process client's requests for math crunching... Question 1: does that mean, with the 3 cores available, I can handle 3 separate client requests simultaneously (e.g. 1 for each of 3 cores)? I mean, except for the shared RAM, is this effectively like having 3 individual machines (from pt of view or processing client requests simulaneously)? Or, only one client's request may be processed at any one time, but that client's request is divided up into up to 3 cores depending on the type of process running that does the math crunching and whether or not it can take advantage of multi threading (so the # of cores impacts how fast any one client request completes)? I'm confused about what the cores mean to the application here. Question 2: As the business grows and more client requests need to be processed, should the server be upgraded to (A) a new machine with more cores, (B) a new machine with two processors, 4 cores each, or (C) keep the original server and add another server with a single processor? Which route provides the most efficient way to scale the application, in terms of processing more client requests per time interval? Is the choice, for example, limited by RAM (when you need more RAM than box can handle it's time to add another server), or something else? Question 3: Is the total number of client requests processed simultaneously equal to the number of cores times the number of servers (minus the one core for Apache)?

    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 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >