Search Results

Search found 7957 results on 319 pages for 'production databases'.

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 40/319 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

  • how to get list of databases that a user owns?

    - by chiggsy
    Id like to find out ( and delete ) all the databases owned by an owner in postgres 8.4.3 I'm new to postgres also, and although I can , and will , read the whole manual today i was forced to use for i in $(psql -l |grep novicedba | awk '{print $1}') psql -d postgres -c " drop database \"$i\"" out of desperation. What's the postgresql way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Production debugging: Is there a less intrusive way than WinDbg?

    - by Alex
    Hi, I was wondering if there is a less intrusive way to analyze a running, managed process in production environments. Less intrusive meaning: No delay of execution when attaching the debugger. No delay of execution when getting basic stats like running threads. In the Java world there is a such a tool part of the JDK. I was wondering if there're similar tools in the .NET world. Any ideas? Alex

    Read the article

  • How can I compare tables in two different databases using SQL?

    - by chama
    I'm trying to compare the schemas of two tables that exist in different databases. So far, I have this query SELECT * FROM sys.columns WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID('table1') The only thing is that I don't know how to use the sys.columns to reference a database other than the one that the query is connected to. I tried this SELECT * FROM db.sys.columns WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID('table1') but it didn't find anything. I'm using SQL Server 2005 Any suggestions? thanks!

    Read the article

  • Grunt: Bower for development and CDN for production - is it possible?

    - by EricC
    For development, I guess it is fine to use a plugin like https://github.com/stephenplusplus/grunt-wiredep But for production I would like to use CDN where such exists. Does it exist a Grunt plugin that goes through the bower.json file and replaces this with a CDN-link from the most popular ones (and if a component is present in more than one CDN, then pick one based on rank-setting or random or something).

    Read the article

  • Production ready alternative to Microsoft Doloto (Javascript minifier/prefetcher)?

    - by usr
    As you surely know Microsoft Doloto is tool which profiles you javascript code as it actually runs on the page and splits it in to two files: one file will be statically included in the footer of the page which contains stubs for all functions and loads the actual implementations (in file 2) in the background (under the assumption that only very litte javascript is needed on page load so you can defer downloading the rest). I found Doloto not to be production ready, it meanwhile has been canceled afaik. Is there a working alternative?

    Read the article

  • How can I setup a flexible local web development environment I can easily sync with a production, Amazon AWS based environment?

    - by user607057
    I'm running on an OS X environment and would like to create a flexible web development environment locally... including the option to run on an Nginx server for my PHP-based application. At the end of the day (or, development cycle), I'd like to be able to hit a switch and have it all sync over to Amazon AWS hosting (EC2, S3) - instances, databases, files, configurations, and all. Are there any simple ways to do this?

    Read the article

  • What would be better, (1 database + 4 tables) or (2 databases + 2 tables each) ?

    - by griseldas
    Hi there, I would like to be advised on what would be better (in regards to performance) A) 1 DATABASE with 4 tables or B) 2 DATABASES (same server), each with 2 tables. The tables size and usage are more or less similar, so the 2 tables on Database 1 would be similar usage/size to the 2 tables on database 2 The tables could have +500,000 records and the 2 tables on each database are not related (no join queries etc between them) Thanks in advance for your comments

    Read the article

  • How do I use beta Perl modules from beta Perl scripts?

    - by DVK
    If my Perl code has a production code location and "beta" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, BETA Perl code is in /usr/code/beta/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and BETA versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/beta/lib/perl, is there an easy way for me to achieve such a setup? The exact requirements are: The code must be THE SAME in production and BETA location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from BETA to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from BETA to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. BETA versions of scripts must call other BETA scripts and BETA libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if BETA libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between BETA and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/beta/) I will present how we solved the problem as an answer to this question, but I'd like to know if there's a better way.

    Read the article

  • How do I use beta test Perl modules from test Perl scripts?

    - by DVK
    If my Perl code has a production code location and "beta" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, BETA Perl code is in /usr/code/beta/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and BETA versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/beta/lib/perl, is there an easy way for me to achieve such a setup? The exact requirements are: The code must be THE SAME in production and BETA location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from BETA to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from BETA to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. BETA versions of scripts must call other BETA scripts and BETA libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if BETA libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between BETA and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/beta/) I will present how we solved the problem as an answer to this question, but I'd like to know if there's a better way.

    Read the article

  • How do I use test Perl modules from test Perl scripts?

    - by DVK
    If my Perl code has a production code location and "test" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, test Perl code is in /usr/code/test/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and test versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/test/lib/perl, is there an easy way for me to achieve such a setup? The exact requirements are: The code must be THE SAME in production and test location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from test to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from test to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. Test versions of scripts must call other test scripts and test libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if test libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between test and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/test/) I will present how we solved the problem as an answer to this question, but I'd like to know if there's a better way.

    Read the article

  • How do I use test/beta Perl modules from test Perl scripts?

    - by DVK
    If my Perl code has a production code location and "beta" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, BETA Perl code is in /usr/code/beta/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and BETA versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/beta/lib/perl, is there an easy way for me to achieve such a setup? The exact requirements are: The code must be THE SAME in production and BETA location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from BETA to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from BETA to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. BETA versions of scripts must call other BETA scripts and BETA libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if BETA libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between BETA and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/beta/) I will present how we solved the problem as an answer to this question, but I'd like to know if there's a better way.

    Read the article

  • Testing Workflows &ndash; Test-After

    - by Timothy Klenke
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TimothyK/archive/2014/05/30/testing-workflows-ndash-test-after.aspxIn this post I’m going to outline a few common methods that can be used to increase the coverage of of your test suite.  This won’t be yet another post on why you should be doing testing; there are plenty of those types of posts already out there.  Assuming you know you should be testing, then comes the problem of how do I actual fit that into my day job.  When the opportunity to automate testing comes do you take it, or do you even recognize it? There are a lot of ways (workflows) to go about creating automated tests, just like there are many workflows to writing a program.  When writing a program you can do it from a top-down approach where you write the main skeleton of the algorithm and call out to dummy stub functions, or a bottom-up approach where the low level functionality is fully implement before it is quickly wired together at the end.  Both approaches are perfectly valid under certain contexts. Each approach you are skilled at applying is another tool in your tool belt.  The more vectors of attack you have on a problem – the better.  So here is a short, incomplete list of some of the workflows that can be applied to increasing the amount of automation in your testing and level of quality in general.  Think of each workflow as an opportunity that is available for you to take. Test workflows basically fall into 2 categories:  test first or test after.  Test first is the best approach.  However, this post isn’t about the one and only best approach.  I want to focus more on the lesser known, less ideal approaches that still provide an opportunity for adding tests.  In this post I’ll enumerate some test-after workflows.  In my next post I’ll cover test-first. Bug Reporting When someone calls you up or forwards you a email with a vague description of a bug its usually standard procedure to create or verify a reproduction plan for the bug via manual testing and log that in a bug tracking system.  This can be problematic.  Often reproduction plans when written down might skip a step that seemed obvious to the tester at the time or they might be missing some crucial environment setting. Instead of data entry into a bug tracking system, try opening up the test project and adding a failing unit test to prove the bug.  The test project guarantees that all aspects of the environment are setup properly and no steps are missing.  The language in the test project is much more precise than the English that goes into a bug tracking system. This workflow can easily be extended for Enhancement Requests as well as Bug Reporting. Exploratory Testing Exploratory testing comes in when you aren’t sure how the system will behave in a new scenario.  The scenario wasn’t planned for in the initial system requirements and there isn’t an existing test for it.  By definition the system behaviour is “undefined”. So write a new unit test to define that behaviour.  Add assertions to the tests to confirm your assumptions.  The new test becomes part of the living system specification that is kept up to date with the test suite. Examples This workflow is especially good when developing APIs.  When you are finally done your production API then comes the job of writing documentation on how to consume the API.  Good documentation will also include code examples.  Don’t let these code examples merely exist in some accompanying manual; implement them in a test suite. Example tests and documentation do not have to be created after the production API is complete.  It is best to write the example code (tests) as you go just before the production code. Smoke Tests Every system has a typical use case.  This represents the basic, core functionality of the system.  If this fails after an upgrade the end users will be hosed and they will be scratching their heads as to how it could be possible that an update got released with this core functionality broken. The tests for this core functionality are referred to as “smoke tests”.  It is a good idea to have them automated and run with each build in order to avoid extreme embarrassment and angry customers. Coverage Analysis Code coverage analysis is a tool that reports how much of the production code base is exercised by the test suite.  In Visual Studio this can be found under the Test main menu item. The tool will report a total number for the code coverage, which can be anywhere between 0 and 100%.  Coverage Analysis shouldn’t be used strictly for numbers reporting.  Companies shouldn’t set minimum coverage targets that mandate that all projects must have at least 80% or 100% test coverage.  These arbitrary requirements just invite gaming of the coverage analysis, which makes the numbers useless. The analysis tool will break down the coverage by the various classes and methods in projects.  Instead of focusing on the total number, drill down into this view and see which classes have high or low coverage.  It you are surprised by a low number on a class this is an opportunity to add tests. When drilling through the classes there will be generally two types of reaction to a surprising low test coverage number.  The first reaction type is a recognition that there is low hanging fruit to be picked.  There may be some classes or methods that aren’t being tested, which could easy be.  The other reaction type is “OMG”.  This were you find a critical piece of code that isn’t under test.  In both cases, go and add the missing tests. Test Refactoring The general theme of this post up to this point has been how to add more and more tests to a test suite.  I’ll step back from that a bit and remind that every line of code is a liability.  Each line of code has to be read and maintained, which costs money.  This is true regardless whether the code is production code or test code. Remember that the primary goal of the test suite is that it be easy to read so that people can easily determine the specifications of the system.  Make sure that adding more and more tests doesn’t interfere with this primary goal. Perform code reviews on the test suite as often as on production code.  Hold the test code up to the same high readability standards as the production code.  If the tests are hard to read then change them.  Look to remove duplication.  Duplicate setup code between two or more test methods that can be moved to a shared function.  Entire test methods can be removed if it is found that the scenario it tests is covered by other tests.  Its OK to delete a test that isn’t pulling its own weight anymore. Remember to only start refactoring when all the test are green.  Don’t refactor the tests and the production code at the same time.  An automated test suite can be thought of as a double entry book keeping system.  The unchanging, passing production code serves as the tests for the test suite while refactoring the tests. As with all refactoring, it is best to fit this into your regular work rather than asking for time later to get it done.  Fit this into the standard red-green-refactor cycle.  The refactor step no only applies to production code but also the tests, but not at the same time.  Perhaps the cycle should be called red-green-refactor production-refactor tests (not quite as catchy).   That about covers most of the test-after workflows I can think of.  In my next post I’ll get into test-first workflows.

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for VMWare web server environment with load balancer.

    - by Ben
    We run IIS websites on a VMWare production server that pull image content and video content from a separate IIS instance on another server (media server). The media calls (images and video) are straight http:// calls and not using a streaming application. During peak traffic periods, we clone the production server five times and have a load balancer distribute traffic to all five production servers. The media server does not get ramped up. We noticed that the processing and resources on the media server gets very taxed during this period. Would it make sense to run the IIS instance for the media server locally on the production server and have it cloned with the production servers, then have a rule on the load balancer negotiating these media calls from the website? Would it be better to allocate more resources (memory and CPUs) to the media server VM and not clone it with the production servers? Recommendations are sincerely appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Oracle buys Secerno

    - by Paulo Folgado
    Adds Heterogeneous Database Firewall to Oracle's Industry-leading Database Security SolutionsRedwood Shores, CA - May 20, 2010News FactsOracle has agreed to acquire Secerno, a provider of database firewall solutions for Oracle and non-Oracle databases.Organizations require a comprehensive security solution which includes database firewall functionality to prevent sophisticated attacks from reaching databases.Secerno's solution adds a critical defensive layer of security around databases, which blocks unauthorized activity in real-time.Secerno's products are expected to augment Oracle's industry-leading portfolio of database security solutions, including Oracle Advanced Security, Oracle Database Vault and Oracle Audit Vault to further ensure data privacy, protect against threats, and enable regulatory compliance.The combination of Oracle and Secerno underscores Oracle's commitment to provide customers with the most comprehensive and advanced security offering that helps reduce the costs and complexity of securing their information throughout the enterprise.The transaction is expected to close before end of June 2010. Financial details of the transaction were not disclosed.Supporting Quote:"The Secerno acquisition is in direct response to increasing customer challenges around mitigating database security risk," said Andrew Mendelsohn, senior vice president, Oracle Database Server Technologies. "Secerno's database firewall product acts as a first line of defense against external threats and unauthorized internal access with a protective perimeter around Oracle and non-Oracle databases. Together, Oracle's complete set of database security solutions and Secerno's technology will provide customers with the ability to safeguard their critical business information.""As a provider of database firewall solutions that help customers safeguard their enterprise databases, Secerno is a natural addition to Oracle's industry-leading database security solutions," said Steve Hurn, CEO Secerno. "Secerno has been providing enterprises and their IT Security departments strong assurance that their databases are protected from attacks and breaches. We are excited to bring Secerno's domain expertise to Oracle, and ensure continuity and success for our current customers, partners and prospects."Support Resources:About Oracle and SecernoGeneral PresentationFAQCustomer LetterPartner Letter

    Read the article

  • Run database checks but omit large tables or filegroups - New option in Ola Hallengren's Scripts

    - by Greg Low
    One of the things I've always wanted in DBCC CHECKDB is the option to omit particular tables from the check. The situation that I often see is that companies with large databases often have only one or two very large tables. They want to run a DBCC CHECKDB on the database to check everything except those couple of tables due to time constraints. I posted a request on the Connect site about time some time ago: https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/611164/dbcc-checkdb-omit-tables-option The workaround from the product team was that you could script out the checks that you did want to carry out, rather than omitting the ones that you didn't. I didn't overly like this as a workaround as clients often had a very large number of objects that they did want to check and only one or two that they didn't. I've always been impressed with the work that our buddy Ola Hallengren has done on his maintenance scripts. He pinged me recently about my old Connect item and said he was going to implement something similar. The good news is that it's available now. Here are some examples he provided of the newly-supported syntax: EXECUTE dbo.DatabaseIntegrityCheck @Databases = 'AdventureWorks', @CheckCommands = 'CHECKDB' EXECUTE dbo.DatabaseIntegrityCheck @Databases = 'AdventureWorks', @CheckCommands = 'CHECKALLOC,CHECKTABLE,CHECKCATALOG', @Objects = 'AdventureWorks.Person.Address' EXECUTE dbo.DatabaseIntegrityCheck @Databases = 'AdventureWorks', @CheckCommands = 'CHECKALLOC,CHECKTABLE,CHECKCATALOG', @Objects = 'ALL_OBJECTS,-AdventureWorks.Person.Address' EXECUTE dbo.DatabaseIntegrityCheck @Databases = 'AdventureWorks', @CheckCommands = 'CHECKFILEGROUP,CHECKCATALOG', @FileGroups = 'AdventureWorks.PRIMARY' EXECUTE dbo.DatabaseIntegrityCheck @Databases = 'AdventureWorks', @CheckCommands = 'CHECKFILEGROUP,CHECKCATALOG', @FileGroups = 'ALL_FILEGROUPS,-AdventureWorks.PRIMARY' Note the syntax to omit an object from the list of objects and the option to omit one filegroup. Nice! Thanks Ola! You'll find details here: http://ola.hallengren.com/  

    Read the article

  • Development teams do not scale

    - by Matt Watson
    Recently I have been thinking about how development teams don't scale very well. The bigger a team and the product get, the more time the team spends fixing software bugs. This means they spend more time doing troubleshooting and debugging as the grow. The problem is that since developers don't typically have access to production servers, there is a bottleneck in the process when doing production troubleshooting.For a team that has 10 developers, I would guess than 0-2 of them have access to production servers. If that team grows to 20 people, it is probably the same 0-2 people that have production access still. This means that those 2 key people are a bottleneck and the team does not scale correctly as you add more resources. All those new developers want is to help track down and fix software bugs, but they don't have the visibility to do it. So they end up being less productive and frustrated because they really want to fix the problems. The people who do have production access end up spending too much of their time doing troubleshooting instead of working on new projects.The solution is to remove the bottlenecks and get those people working on more important tasks. Stackify can solve this problem by giving all the developers read only access to production servers. This allows them to access the information they need to do troubleshooting on their own.

    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 | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >