Search Results

Search found 38931 results on 1558 pages for 'database testing'.

Page 41/1558 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

  • Using Rails, problem testing has_many relationship

    - by east
    The summary is that I've code that works when manually testing, but isn't doing what I would think it should when trying to build an automated test. Here are the details: I've two models: Payment and PaymentTranscation. class Payment ... has_many :transactions, :class_name => 'PaymentTransaction' class PaymentTranscation ... belongs_to payment The PaymentTransaction is only created in a Payment model method, like so: def pay_up ... transactions.create!(params...) ... end I've manually tested this code, inspected the database, and everything works well. The failing automated test looks like this: def test_pay_up purchase = Payment.new(...) assert purchase.save assert_equal purchase.state, :initialized.to_s assert purchase.pay_up # this should create a new PaymentTransaction... assert_equal purchase.state, :succeeded.to_s assert_equal purchase.transactions.count, 1 # FAILS HERE; transactions is an empty array end If I step through the code, it's clear that the PaymentTransaction is getting created correctly (though I can't see it in the database because everything is in a testing transaction). What I can't figure out is why transactions is returning an empty array in the test when I know a valid PaymentTransaction is getting created. Anybody have some suggestions? Thanks in advance, east

    Read the article

  • Generating JavaScript in C# and subsequent testing

    - by Codebrain
    We are currently developing an ASP.NET MVC application which makes heavy use of attribute-based metadata to drive the generation of JavaScript. Below is a sample of the type of methods we are writing: function string GetJavascript<T>(string javascriptPresentationFunctionName, string inputId, T model) { return @"function updateFormInputs(value){ $('#" + inputId + @"_SelectedItemState').val(value); $('#" + inputId + @"_Presentation').val(value); } function clearInputs(){ " + helper.ClearHiddenInputs<T>(model) + @" updateFormInputs(''); } function handleJson(json){ clearInputs(); " + helper.UpdateHiddenInputsWithJson<T>("json", model) + @" updateFormInputs(" + javascriptPresentationFunctionName + @"()); " + model.GetCallBackFunctionForJavascript("json") + @" }"; } This method generates some boilerplace and hands off to various other methods which return strings. The whole lot is then returned as a string and written to the output. The question(s) I have are: 1) Is there a nicer way to do this other than using large string blocks? We've considered using a StringBuilder or the Response Stream but it seems quite 'noisy'. Using string.format starts to become difficult to comprehend. 2) How would you go about unit testing this code? It seems a little amateur just doing a string comparison looking for particular output in the string. 3) What about actually testing the eventual JavaScript output? Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • Testing performance of queries in mysl

    - by Unreason
    I am trying to setup a script that would test performance of queries on a development mysql server. Here are more details: I have root access I am the only user accessing the server Mostly interested in InnoDB performance The queries I am optimizing are mostly search queries (SELECT ... LIKE '%xy%') What I want to do is to create reliable testing environment for measuring the speed of a single query, free from dependencies on other variables. Till now I have been using SQL_NO_CACHE, but sometimes the results of such tests also show caching behaviour - taking much longer to execute on the first run and taking less time on subsequent runs. If someone can explain this behaviour in full detail I might stick to using SQL_NO_CACHE; I do believe that it might be due to file system cache and/or caching of indexes used to execute the query, as this post explains. It is not clear to me when Buffer Pool and Key Buffer get invalidated or how they might interfere with testing. So, short of restarting mysql server, how would you recommend to setup an environment that would be reliable in determining if one query performs better then the other?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC unit testing

    - by Simon Lomax
    Hi, I'm getting started with unit testing and trying to do some TDD. I've read a fair bit about the subject and written a few tests. I just want to know if the following is the right approach. I want to add the usual "contact us" facility on my web site. You know the thing, the user fills out a form with their email address, enters a brief message and hits a button to post the form back. The model binders do their stuff and my action method accepts the posted data as a model. The action method would then parse the model and use smtp to send an email to the web site administrator infoming him/her that somebody filled out the contact form on their site. Now for the question .... In order to test this, would I be right in creating an interface IDeliver that has a method Send(emailAddress, message) to accept the email address and message body. Implement the inteface in a concrete class and let that class deal with smtp stuff and actually send the mail. If I add the inteface as a parameter to my controller constructor I can then use DI and IoC to inject the concrete class into the controller. But when unit testing I can create a fake or mock version of my IDeliver and do assertions on that. The reason I ask is that I've seen other examples of people generating interfaces for SmtpClient and then mocking that. Is there really any need to go that far or am I not understanding this stuff?

    Read the article

  • Automatic testing of GUI related private methods

    - by Stein G. Strindhaug
    When it comes to GUI programming (at least for web) I feel that often the only thing that would be useful to unit test is some of the private methods*. While unit testing makes perfect sense for back-end code, I feel it doesn't quite fit the GUI classes. What is the best way to add automatic testing of these? * Why I think the only methods useful to test is private: Often when I write GUI classes they don't even have any public methods except for the constructor. The public methods if any is trivial, and the constructor does most of the job calling private methods. They receive some data from server does a lot of trivial output and feeds data to the constructor of other classes contained inside it, adding listeners that calls a (more or less directly) calls the server... Most of it pretty trivial (the hardest part is the layout: css, IE, etc.) but sometimes I create some private method that does some advanced tricks, which I definitely do not want to be publicly visible (because it's closely coupled to the implementation of the layout, and likely to change), but is sufficiently complicated to break. These are often only called by the constructor or repeatedly by events in the code, not by any public methods at all. I'd like to have a way to test this type of methods, without making it public or resorting to reflection trickery. (BTW: I'm currently using GWT, but I feel this applies to most languages/frameworks I've used when coding for GUI)

    Read the article

  • Testing subpackage modules in Python 3

    - by Mitchell Model
    I have been experimenting with various uses of hierarchies like this and the differences between absolute and relative imports, and can't figure out how to do routine things with the package, subpackages, and modules without simply putting everything on sys.path. I have a two-level package hierarchy: MyApp __init__.py Application __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... Domain __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... UI __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... I want to be able to do the following: Run test code in a Module's "if main" when the module imports from other modules in the same directory. Have one or more test code modules in each subpackage that runs unit tests on the modules in the subpackage. Have a set of unit tests that reside in someplace reasonable, but outside the subpackages, either in a sibling package, at the top-level package, or outside the top-level package (though all these might end up doing is running the tests in each subpackage) "Enter" the structure from any of the three subpackage levels, e.g. run code that just uses Domain modules, run code that just uses Application modules, but Application uses code from both Application and Domain modules, and run code from GUI uses code from both GUI and Application; for instance, Application test code would import Application modules but not Domain modules. After developing the bulk of the code without subpackages, continue developing and testing after organizing the modules into this hierarchy. I know how to use relative imports so that external code that puts MyApp on its sys.path can import MyApp, import any subpackages it wants, and import things from their modules, while the modules in each subpackage can import other modules from the same subpackage or from sibling packages. However, the development needs listed above seem incompatible with subpackage structuring -- in other words, I can't have it both ways: a well-structured multi-level package hierarchy used from the outside and also used from within, in particular for testing but also because modules from one design level (in particular the UI) should not import modules from a design level below the next one down. Sorry for the long essay, but I think it fairly represents the struggles a lot of people have been having adopting to the new relative import mechanisms.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing with Mocks. Test behaviour not implementation

    - by Kenny Eliasson
    Hi.. I always had a problem when unit testing classes that calls other classes, for example I have a class that creates a new user from a phone-number then saves it to the database and sends a SMS to the number provided. Like the code provided below. public class UserRegistrationProcess : IUserRegistration { private readonly IRepository _repository; private readonly ISmsService _smsService; public UserRegistrationProcess(IRepository repository, ISmsService smsService) { _repository = repository; _smsService = smsService; } public void Register(string phone) { var user = new User(phone); _repository.Save(user); _smsService.Send(phone, "Welcome", "Message!"); } } It is a really simple class but how would you go about and test it? At the moment im using Mocks but I dont really like it [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_TheNewUserIsSavedToTheDatabase() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); repository.Verify(x => x.Save(It.Is<User>(user => user.Phone == phone)), Times.Once()); } [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_ItWillSendANewSms() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); smsService.Verify(x => x.Send(phone, It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once()); } It feels like I am testing the wrong thing here? Any thoughts on how to make this better?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing-- fundamental goal?

    - by David
    Me and my co-workers had a bit of a disagreement last night about unit testing in our PHP/MySQL application. Half of us argued that when unit testing a function within a class, you should mock everything outside of that class and its parents. The other half of us argued that you SHOULDN'T mock anything that is a direct dependancy of the class either. The specific example was our logging mechanism, which happened through a static Logging class, and we had a number of Logging::log() calls in various locations throughout our application. The first half of us said the Logging mechanism should be faked (mocked) because it would be tested in the Logging unit tests. The second half of us argued that we should include the original Logging class in our unit test so that if we make a change to our logging interface, we'll be able to see if it creates problems in other parts of the application due to failing to update the call interface. So I guess the fundamental question is-- do unit tests serve to test the functionality of a single unit in a closed environment, or show the consequences of changes to a single unit in a larger environment? If it's one of these, how do you accomplish the other?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Private Method in Resource Managing Class (C++)

    - by BillyONeal
    I previously asked this question under another name but deleted it because I didn't explain it very well. Let's say I have a class which manages a file. Let's say that this class treats the file as having a specific file format, and contains methods to perform operations on this file: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. //Return the checksum. } }; Let's say I'd like to be able to unit test the part of this class that calculates the checksum. Unit testing the parts of the class that load in the file and such is impractical, because to test every part of the getChecksum() method I might need to construct 40 or 50 files! Now lets say I'd like to reuse the checksum method elsewhere in the class. I extract the method so that it now looks like this: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; static int calculateChecksum(const std::vector<unsigned char> &fileBytes) { //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. } public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it return calculateChecksum( something ); } void modifyThisFileSomehow() { //Perform modification int newChecksum = calculateChecksum( something ); //Apply the newChecksum to the file } }; Now I'd like to unit test the calculateChecksum() method because it's easy to test and complicated, and I don't care about unit testing getChecksum() because it's simple and very difficult to test. But I can't test calculateChecksum() directly because it is private. Does anyone know of a solution to this problem?

    Read the article

  • What is the purpose of unit testing an interface repository

    - by ahsteele
    I am unit testing an ICustomerRepository interface used for retrieving objects of type Customer. As a unit test what value am I gaining by testing the ICustomerRepository in this manner? Under what conditions would the below test fail? For tests of this nature is it advisable to do tests that I know should fail? i.e. look for id 4 when I know I've only placed 5 in the repository I am probably missing something obvious but it seems the integration tests of the class that implements ICustomerRepository will be of more value. [TestClass] public class CustomerTests : TestClassBase { private Customer SetUpCustomerForRepository() { return new Customer() { CustId = 5, DifId = "55", CustLookupName = "The Dude", LoginList = new[] { new Login { LoginCustId = 5, LoginName = "tdude" }, new Login { LoginCustId = 5, LoginName = "tdude2" } } }; } [TestMethod] public void CanGetCustomerById() { // arrange var customer = SetUpCustomerForRepository(); var repository = Stub<ICustomerRepository>(); // act repository.Stub(rep => rep.GetById(5)).Return(customer); // assert Assert.AreEqual(customer, repository.GetById(5)); } } Test Base Class public class TestClassBase { protected T Stub<T>() where T : class { return MockRepository.GenerateStub<T>(); } } ICustomerRepository and IRepository public interface ICustomerRepository : IRepository<Customer> { IList<Customer> FindCustomers(string q); Customer GetCustomerByDifID(string difId); Customer GetCustomerByLogin(string loginName); } public interface IRepository<T> { void Save(T entity); void Save(List<T> entity); bool Save(T entity, out string message); void Delete(T entity); T GetById(int id); ICollection<T> FindAll(); }

    Read the article

  • Framework or tool for "distributed unit testing"?

    - by user262646
    Is there any tool or framework able to make it easier to test distributed software written in Java? My system under test is a peer-to-peer software, and I'd like to perform testing using something like PNUnit, but with Java instead of .Net. The system under test is a framework I'm developing to build P2P applications. It uses JXTA as a lower subsystem, trying to hide some complexities of it. It's currently an academic project, so I'm pursuing simplicity at this moment. In my test, I want to demonstrate that a peer (running in its own process, possibly with multiple threads) can discover another one (running in another process or even another machine) and that they can exchange a few messages. I'm not using mocks nor stubs because I need to see both sides working simultaneously. I realize that some kind of coordination mechanism is needed, and PNUnit seems to be able to do that. I've bumped into some initiatives like Pisces, which "aims to provide a distributed testing environment that extends JUnit, giving the developer/tester an ability to run remote JUnits and create complex test suites that are composed of several remote JUnit tests running in parallel or serially", but this project and a few others I have found seem to be long dead.

    Read the article

  • Best practice for debug Asserts during Unit testing

    - by Steve Steiner
    Does heavy use of unit tests discourage the use of debug asserts? It seems like a debug assert firing in the code under test implies the unit test shouldn't exist or the debug assert shouldn't exist. "There can be only one" seems like a reasonable principle. Is this the common practice? Or do you disable your debug asserts when unit testing, so they can be around for integration testing? Edit: I updated 'Assert' to debug assert to distinguish an assert in the code under test from the lines in the unit test that check state after the test has run. Also here is an example that I believe shows the dilema: A unit test passes invalid inputs for a protected function that asserts it's inputs are valid. Should the unit test not exist? It's not a public function. Perhaps checking the inputs would kill perf? Or should the assert not exist? The function is protected not private so it should be checking it's inputs for safety.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing - Algorithm or Sample based ?

    - by ohadsc
    Say I'm trying to test a simple Set class public IntSet : IEnumerable<int> { Add(int i) {...} //IEnumerable implementation... } And suppose I'm trying to test that no duplicate values can exist in the set. My first option is to insert some sample data into the set, and test for duplicates using my knowledge of the data I used, for example: //OPTION 1 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //3 will be added 3 times var values = new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I know 3 is the only candidate to appear multiple times int counter = 0; foreach (int i in set) if (i == 3) counter++; Assert.AreEqual(1, counter); } My second option is to test for my condition generically: //OPTION 2 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //The following could even be a list of random numbers with a duplicate var values = new List<int> { 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I am not using my prior knowledge of the sample data //the following line would work for any data CollectionAssert.AreEquivalent(new HashSet<int>(values), set); } Of course, in this example, I conveniently have a set implementation to check against, as well as code to compare collections (CollectionAssert). But what if I didn't have either ? This is the situation when you are testing your real life custom business logic. Granted, testing for expected conditions generically covers more cases - but it becomes very similar to implementing the logic again (which is both tedious and useless - you can't use the same code to check itself!). Basically I'm asking whether my tests should look like "insert 1, 2, 3 then check something about 3" or "insert 1, 2, 3 and check for something in general" EDIT - To help me understand, please state in your answer if you prefer OPTION 1 or OPTION 2 (or neither, or that it depends on the case, etc )

    Read the article

  • C++ and Dependency Injection in unit testing

    - by lhumongous
    Suppose I have a C++ class like so: class A { public: A() { } void SetNewB( const B& _b ) { m_B = _b; } private: B m_B; } In order to unit test something like this, I would have to break A's dependency on B. Since class A holds onto an actual object and not a pointer, I would have to refactor this code to take a pointer. Additionally, I would need to create a parent interface class for B so I can pass in my own fake of B when I test SetNewB. In this case, doesn't unit testing with dependency injection further complicate the existing code? If I make B a pointer, I'm now introducing heap allocation, and some piece of code is now responsible for cleaning it up (unless I use ref counted pointers). Additionally, if B is a rather trivial class with only a couple of member variables and functions, why introduce a whole new interface for it instead of just testing with an instance of B? I suppose you could make the argument that it would be easier to refactor A by using an interface. But are there some cases where two classes might need to be tightly coupled?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing a 'legacy' WPF Application

    - by sc_ray
    The product I have been working on has been in development for the past six years. It started as a generic data entry portal into an insanely complex part WPF/part legacy application. The system has been developed for all these years without a single Unit test in its fold. Now, the point has been raised for a comprehensive unit testing framework. I have been recruited recently to work on this product and have been tasked to get the 'Testing' in order. Since the team that worked on the product for the last six years adopted 'Agile', the project lacks any documentation of the business rules or any design documents. I have been trying to write unit tests for some of the modules. But I am not sure what to Mock, how to setup my Test fixture and eventually what to Test for, since a casual glance of the methods does not reveal its intentions. Also, it has come to my attention that the code was not developed with a particular methodology in mind. Given the situation, I was wondering if the good people of Stackoverflow could provide me with some advise on how to salvage this situation. I have heard about the book 'Working with Legacy Code' that has something to say about this general situation but I was thinking about getting some pointers from individuals who have encountered similar situations within the technology stack(C#,VB,C++,.NET 3.5,WCF,SQL Server 2005).

    Read the article

  • Integration testing - can it be done right?

    - by Max
    I used TDD as a development style on some projects in the past two years, but I always get stuck on the same point: how can I test the integration of the various parts of my program? What I am currently doing is writing a testcase per class (this is my rule of thumb: a "unit" is a class, and each class has one or more testcases). I try to resolve dependencies by using mocks and stubs and this works really well as each class can be tested independently. After some coding, all important classes are tested. I then "wire" them together using an IoC container. And here I am stuck: How to test if the wiring was successfull and the objects interact the way I want? An example: Think of a web application. There is a controller class which takes an array of ids, uses a repository to fetch the records based on these ids and then iterates over the records and writes them as a string to an outfile. To make it simple, there would be three classes: Controller, Repository, OutfileWriter. Each of them is tested in isolation. What I would do in order to test the "real" application: making the http request (either manually or automated) with some ids from the database and then look in the filesystem if the file was written. Of course this process could be automated, but still: doesn´t that duplicate the test-logic? Is this what is called an "integration test"? In a book i recently read about Unit Testing it seemed to me that integration testing was more of an anti-pattern?

    Read the article

  • Discount Codes Galore

    - by Cassandra Clark
    Saving money is at the top of everyones list right now. With this in mind the Oracle Technology Network team has compiled a list of discounts available at the Oracle Store. We are also introducing an Oracle Technology Network member discount from O'Reilly Media. If you subscribe to any of the Oracle Technology newsletters you also saw special discounts from CRC Press, Packt Publishing and Apress. We are going to do our best to bring you more offers like this every month. Now on to the discounts... Oracle Store offers - all below expiring May 31st 2010. Don't miss out! Expand Your Productivity with Oracle Open Office and Save 15%? Enter OTNOffice at checkout. Buy Now! Drive Business Agility and Performance with Industry-leading Oracle Database Management Packs.  Save 10% when you purchase them at the Oracle Store. Enter OTNDBMP at checkout. Buy Now! 15% Savings on Oracle Virtualization and Unbreakable Linux Support at the Oracle Store Enter code OTNLinuxVM at checkout. Buy Now! 20% Savings on Oracle SQL Developer Data Modeler Use OTNSQL at checkout. Buy Now! O'Reilly Oracle Technology Network Member Offer O'Reilly is generously offering Oracle Technology Network Members 35% off for print books and 40% off of eBooks. Browse Oracle titles at- http://oreilly.com/pub/topic/oracle. Use discount code TECNT at checkout.

    Read the article

  • DB Schema for ACL involving 3 subdomains

    - by blacktie24
    Hi, I am trying to design a database schema for a web app which has 3 subdomains: a) internal employees b) clients c) contractors. The users will be able to communicate with each other to some degree, and there may be some resources that overlap between them. Any thoughts about this schema? Really appreciate your time and thoughts on this. Cheers! -- -- Table structure for table locations CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS locations ( id bigint(20) NOT NULL, name varchar(250) NOT NULL ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; -- -- Table structure for table privileges CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS privileges ( id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, name varchar(255) NOT NULL, resource_id int(11) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=10 ; -- -- Table structure for table resources CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS resources ( id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, name varchar(255) NOT NULL, user_type enum('internal','client','expert') NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=3 ; -- -- Table structure for table roles CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS roles ( id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, name varchar(255) NOT NULL, type enum('position','department') NOT NULL, parent_id int(11) DEFAULT NULL, user_type enum('internal','client','expert') NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=3 ; -- -- Table structure for table role_perms CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS role_perms ( id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, role_id int(11) NOT NULL, privilege_id int(11) NOT NULL, mode varchar(250) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=2 ; -- -- Table structure for table users CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS users ( id int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, email varchar(255) NOT NULL, password varchar(255) NOT NULL, salt varchar(255) NOT NULL, type enum('internal','client','expert') NOT NULL, first_name varchar(255) NOT NULL, last_name varchar(255) NOT NULL, location_id int(11) NOT NULL, phone varchar(255) NOT NULL, status enum('active','inactive') NOT NULL DEFAULT 'active', PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=4 ; -- -- Table structure for table user_perms CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS user_perms ( id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, user_id int(11) NOT NULL, privilege_id int(11) NOT NULL, mode varchar(250) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=2 ; -- -- Table structure for table user_roles CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS user_roles ( id int(11) NOT NULL, user_id int(11) NOT NULL, role_id int(11) NOT NULL ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;

    Read the article

  • Oracle Database 12 c Training and Certification: What’s in it for Me?

    - by KJones
    Oracle Database 12c has officially launched! Through Oracle University, our expert instructors can introduce you to the features and functions of this new Oracle Database 12c product. Through training courses and certification exam prep seminars, you can build up your database knowledge and apply this knowledge to advance your career. Already an Oracle Database Expert? Why Oracle Database 12c Training is still a Good Idea Oracle is the industry leader for database technology and takes the release of new products very seriously. We continue to listen to customer needs and add features and functionality to address those needs. Oracle Database 12c is no exception. The following areas have been greatly enhanced and should be considered for your additional training or certification: • Database for Cloud Computing • Compression and Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) • Improved Performance & Scalability • Extreme Availability • Security Defense in Depth • Manageability Oracle Certified Database Administrators Reap Career Rewards Becoming an expert user of database technology through Oracle University's certification program widens your skill set to demonstrate your expertise implementing the most advanced database technology available. By doing so, you'll make yourself a more marketable employee and candidate in the job market.  Reasons to Become an Oracle Certified Database Administrator of Oracle Database 12c: • The new Oracle Database 12c certifications emphasize more advanced skills that align with industry standards, resulting in an even more valuable credential for customers and partners. • The Oracle Certified Associate (OCA) for Oracle Database 12c centers upon certification objectives that measure IT professionals' day-to-day skills, along with your ability to manage challenges. • Building upon all of the competencies incorporated into Oracle's Database 12c OCA certification, the Oracle Certified Professional (OCP) for Oracle Database 12c certification includes advanced knowledge and skills required of top-performing database administrators. • The Oracle Certified Master (OCM) for Oracle Database 12c - a very challenging and elite top-level certification - certifies the most highly skilled and experienced database experts. • Oracle offers 12c upgrade paths for existing Oracle Certified Professionals (OCP) and Oracle Certified Masters (OCM). Database 12c Training and Certification: Built with Your Input When creating Oracle Database 12c training courses and certifications, we wanted to know which tasks are most important in a DBA's day-to-day work. Instead of assuming what those tasks might be, we decided to develop a job task analysis survey for DBAs. The response rate from DBAs from around the world was overwhelming! The survey focused on the following key database areas: • DBA Core Essentials • Database Storage • High Availability • Scalability • Networking • Security • Very Large Database Administration • Distributed Databases After conducting this survey, we took this specific feedback and used it to help mold the new Oracle Database 12c training and certification curriculum. The benefit to you? You now have access to Oracle Database 12c courses and certification exams that were created with your specific on-the-job tasks in mind. Explore Oracle Database 12c Training & Certification Today Investing in Oracle Database 12c training courses and certifications will help you develop a great deal of knowledge, experience and expertise. Explore our portfolio of offerings to determine which skills you need as a DBA to get up-to-speed on Oracle Database 12c technology. Questions or comments about the new Oracle Database 12c offerings? Let us know in the comments below. - Diana Gray, Principle Curriculum Product Manager and Raza Siddiqui, Senior Principle Curriculum Product Manager

    Read the article

  • updating changes from one database to another database in the same server

    - by Pavan Kumar
    I have a copy of client database say 'DBCopy' which already contains modified data. The copy of the client database (DBCopy) is attached to the SQL Server where the Central Database (DBCentral) exists. Then I want to update whatever changes already present in DBCopy to DBCentral. Both DBCopy and DBCentral have same schema. How can i do it programatically using C#.NET maybe with a button click. Can you give me an example code as how to do it?. I am using SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition and VS 2008 SP1. In the actual scenario there are about 7 client database all with same schema as the central database. I am bringing copy of each client database and attach it to Central Server where the central database resides and try to update changes present in each copy of the client database to central database one by one programatically using C# .NET . The clients and the central server are physically seperate machines present in different places. They are not interconnected. I need to only update and insert new data. I am not bothered about deletion of data. Thanks and regards Pavan

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Move Database Files MDF and LDF to Another Location

    - by pinaldave
    When a novice DBA or Developer create a database they use SQL Server Management Studio to create new database. Additionally, the T-SQL script to create a database is very easy as well. You can just write CREATE DATABASE DatabaseName and it will create new database for you. The point to remember here is that it will create the database at the default location specified for SQL Server Instance (this default instance can be changed and we will see that in future blog posts). Now, once the database goes in production it will start to grow. It is not common to keep the Database on the same location where OS is installed. Usually Database files are on SAN, Separate Disk Array or on SSDs. This is done usually for performance reason and manageability perspective. Now the challenges comes up when database which was installed at not preferred default location and needs to move to a different location. Here is the quick tutorial how you can do it. Let us assume we have two folders loc1 and loc2. We want to move database files from loc1 to loc2. USE MASTER; GO -- Take database in single user mode -- if you are facing errors -- This may terminate your active transactions for database ALTER DATABASE TestDB SET SINGLE_USER WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE; GO -- Detach DB EXEC MASTER.dbo.sp_detach_db @dbname = N'TestDB' GO Now move the files from loc1 to loc2. You can now reattach the files with new locations. -- Move MDF File from Loc1 to Loc 2 -- Re-Attached DB CREATE DATABASE [TestDB] ON ( FILENAME = N'F:\loc2\TestDB.mdf' ), ( FILENAME = N'F:\loc2\TestDB_log.ldf' ) FOR ATTACH GO Well, we are done. There is little warning here for you: If you do ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE you may terminate your active transactions so do not use it randomly. Do it if you are confident that they are not needed or due to any reason there is a connection to the database which you are not able to kill manually after review. Reference : Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Backup and Restore, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Database Snapshot in Sql Server 2005

    A database snapshot is a read-only, static view of a database (called the source database). Each database snapshot is transactionally consistent with the source database at the moment of the snapshot's creation. When you create a database snapshot, the source database will typically have open transactions. Before the snapshot becomes available, the open transactions are rolled back to make the database snapshot transactionally consistent.

    Read the article

  • Firebird 2.1: gfix -online returns "database shutdown"

    - by darvids0n
    Hey all. Googling this one hasn't made a bit of difference, unfortunately, as most results specify the syntax for onlining a database after using gfix -shut -force 30 (or any other number of seconds) as gfix -online dbname, and I have run gfix -online dbname with and without login credentials for the DB in question. The message that I get is: database dbname shutdown Which is fine, except that I want to bring it online now. It's out of the question to close fbserver.exe (running on a Windows box, afaik it's Classic Server 2.1.1 but it may be Super) since we have other databases running off of that which need almost 24/7 uptime. The message from doing another gfix -shut -force or -attach or -tran is invalid shutdown mode for dbname which appears to match with the documentation of what happens if the database is already fully shut down. Ideas and input greatly appreciated, especially since at the moment time is a factor for me. Thanks! EDIT: The whole reason I shut down the DB is to clear out "active" transactions which were linked to a specific IP address, and that computer is my dev terminal (actually a virtual machine where I develop frontends for the database software) but I had no processes connecting to the database at the time. They looked like orphaned transactions to me, and they weren't in limbo afaik. Running a manual sweep didn't clear them out, deleting the rows from MON$STATEMENTS didn't work even though Firebird 2.1 supposedly supports cancelling queries that way. My last resort was to "restart" the database, hence the above issue.

    Read the article

  • Collaborate10 &ndash; THEconference

    - by jean-pierre.dijcks
    After spending a few days in Mandalay Bay's THEHotel, I guess I now call everything THE... Seriously, they even tag their toilet paper with THEtp... I guess the brand builders in Vegas thought that once you are on to something you keep on doing it, and granted it is a nice hotel with nice rooms. THEanalytics Most of my collab10 experience was in a room called Reef C, where the BIWA bootcamp was held. Two solid days of BI, Warehousing and Analytics organized by the BIWA SIG at IOUG. Didn't get to see all sessions, but what struck me was the high interest in Analytics. Marty Gubar's OLAP session was full and he did some very nice things with the OLAP option. The cool bit was that he actually gets all the advanced calculations in OLAP to show up in OBI EE without any effort. It was nice to see that the idea from OWB where you generate an RPD is now also in AWM. I think it makes life so much simpler to generate these RPD's from your data model. Even if the end RPD needs some tweaking, it is all a lot less effort to get something going. You can see this stuff for yourself in this demo (click here). OBI EE uses just SQL to get to the calculations, and so, if you prefer APEX, you can build you application there and get the same nice calculations in an APEX application. Marty also showed the Simba MDX driver used with Excel. I guess we should call that THEcoolone... and it is very slick and wonderfully useful for all of you who actually know Excel. The nice thing is that you leverage pure Excel for all operations (no plug-ins). That means no new tools to learn, no new controls, all just pure Excel. THEdatabasemachine Got some very good questions in my "what makes Exadata fast" session and overall, the interest in Exadata is overwhelming. One of the things that I did try to do in my session is to get people to think in new patterns rather than in patterns based on Oracle 9i running on some random hardware configuration. We talked a little bit about the often over-indexing and how everyone has to unlearn all of that on Exadata. The main thing however is that everyone needs to get used to the shear size of some of the components in a Database machine V2. 5TB of flash cache is a lot of very fast data storage, half a TB of memory gets quite interesting as well. So what I did there was really focus on some of the content in these earlier posts on Upward ILM and In-Memory processing. In short, I do believe the these newer media point out a trend. In-memory and other fast media will get cheaper and will see more use. Some of that we do automatically by adding new functionality, but in some cases I think the end user of the system needs to start thinking about how to leverage all this new hardware. I think most people got very excited about these new capabilities and opportunities. THEcoolkids One of the cool things about the BIWA track was the hand-on track. Very cool to see big crowds for both OLAP and OWB hands-on. Also quite nice to see that the folks at RittmanMead spent so much time on preparing for that session. While all of them put down cool stuff, none was more cool that seeing Data Mining on an Apple iPAD... it all just looks great on an iPAD! Very disappointing to see that Mark Rittman still wasn't showing OWB on his iPAD ;-) THEend All in all this was a great set of sessions in the BIWA track. Lots of value to our guests (we hope) and we hope they all come again next year!

    Read the article

  • Is Oracle Database Appliance (ODA) A Best Kept Secret?

    - by Ravi.Sharma
    There is something about Oracle Database Appliance that underscores the tremendous value customers see in the product. Repeat purchases. When you buy “one” of something and come back to buy another, it confirms that the product met your expectations, you found good value in it, and perhaps you will continue to use it. But when you buy “one” and come back to buy many more on your very next purchase, it tells something else. It tells that you truly believe that you have found the best value out there. That you are convinced! That you are sold on the great idea and have discovered a product that far exceeds your expectations and delivers tremendous value! Many Oracle Database Appliance customers are such larger-volume-repeat-buyers. It is no surprise, that the product has a deeper penetration in many accounts where a customer made an initial purchase. The value proposition of Oracle Database Appliance is undeniably strong and extremely compelling. This is especially true for customers who are simply upgrading or “refreshing” their hardware (and reusing software licenses). For them, the ability to acquire world class, highly available database hardware along with leading edge management software and all of the automation is absolutely a steal. One customer DBA recently said, “Oracle Database Appliance is the best investment our company has ever made”. Such extreme statements do not come out of thin air. You have to experience it to believe it. Oracle Database Appliance is a low cost product. Not many sales managers may be knocking on your doors to sell it. But the great value it delivers to small and mid-size businesses and database implementations should not be underestimated. 

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >