Search Results

Search found 9436 results on 378 pages for 'component architecture'.

Page 45/378 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • Declarative Architectures in Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)

    - by BuckWoody
    I deal with computing architectures by first laying out requirements, and then laying in any constraints for it's success. Only then do I bring in computing elements to apply to the system. As an example, a requirement might be "world-side availability" and a constraint might be "with less than 80ms response time and full HA" or something similar. Then I can choose from the best fit of technologies which range from full-up on-premises computing to IaaS, PaaS or SaaS. I also deal in abstraction layers - on-premises systems are fully under your control, in IaaS the hardware is abstracted (but not the OS, scale, runtimes and so on), in PaaS the hardware and the OS is abstracted and you focus on code and data only, and in SaaS everything is abstracted - you merely purchase the function you want (like an e-mail server or some such) and simply use it. When you think about solutions this way, the architecture moves to the primary factor in your decision. It's problem-first architecting, and then laying in whatever technology or vendor best fixes the problem. To that end, most architects design a solution using a graphical tool (I use Visio) and then creating documents that  let the rest of the team (and business) know what is required. It's the template, or recipe, for the solution. This is extremely easy to do for SaaS - you merely point out what the needs are, research the vendor and present the findings (and bill) to the business. IT might not even be involved there. In PaaS it's not much more complicated - you use the same Application Lifecycle Management and design tools you always have for code, such as Visual Studio or some other process and toolset, and you can "stamp out" the application in multiple locations, update it and so on. IaaS is another story. Here you have multiple machines, operating systems, patches, virus scanning, run-times, scale-patterns and tools and much more that you have to deal with, since essentially it's just an in-house system being hosted by someone else. You can certainly automate builds of servers - we do this as technical professionals every day. From Windows to Linux, it's simple enough to create a "build script" that makes a system just like the one we made yesterday. What is more problematic is being able to tie those systems together in a coherent way (as a solution) and then stamp that out repeatedly, especially when you might want to deploy that solution on-premises, or in one cloud vendor or another. Lately I've been working with a company called RightScale that does exactly this. I'll point you to their site for more info, but the general idea is that you document out your intent for a set of servers, and it will deploy them to on-premises clouds, Windows Azure, and other cloud providers all from the same script. In other words, it doesn't contain the images or anything like that - it contains the scripts to build them on-premises or on a cloud vendor like Microsoft. Using a tool like this, you combine the steps of designing a system (all the way down to passwords and accounts if you wish) and then the document drives the distribution and implementation of that intent. As time goes on and more and more companies implement solutions on various providers (perhaps for HA and DR) then this becomes a compelling investigation. The RightScale information is here, if you want to investigate it further. Yes, there are other methods I've found, but most are tied to a single kind of cloud, and I'm not into vendor lock-in. Poppa Bear Level - Hands-on EvaluateRightScale at no cost.  Just bring your Windows Azurecredentials and follow the these tutorials: Sign Up for Windows Azure Add     Windows Azure to a RightScale Account Windows Azure Virtual Machines     3-tier Deployment Momma Bear Level - Just the Right level... ;0)  WindowsAzure Evaluation Guide - if you are new toWindows Azure Virtual Machines and new to RightScale, we recommend that youread the entire evaluation guide to gain a more complete understanding of theWindows Azure + RightScale solution.    WindowsAzure Support Page @ support.rightscale.com - FAQ's, tutorials,etc. for  Windows Azure Virtual Machines (Work in Progress) Baby Bear Level - Marketing WindowsAzure Page @ www.rightscale.com - find overview informationincluding solution briefs and presentation & demonstration videos   Scale     and Automate Applications on Windows Azure  Solution Brief     - how RightScale makes Windows Azure Virtual Machine even better SQL     Server on Windows Azure  Solution Brief   -       Run Highly Available SQL Server on Windows Azure Virtual Machines

    Read the article

  • High Availability for IaaS, PaaS and SaaS in the Cloud

    - by BuckWoody
    Outages, natural disasters and unforeseen events have proved that even in a distributed architecture, you need to plan for High Availability (HA). In this entry I'll explain a few considerations for HA within Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). In a separate post I'll talk more about Disaster Recovery (DR), since each paradigm has a different way to handle that. Planning for HA in IaaS IaaS involves Virtual Machines - so in effect, an HA strategy here takes on many of the same characteristics as it would on-premises. The primary difference is that the vendor controls the hardware, so you need to verify what they do for things like local redundancy and so on from the hardware perspective. As far as what you can control and plan for, the primary factors fall into three areas: multiple instances, geographical dispersion and task-switching. In almost every cloud vendor I've studied, to ensure your application will be protected by any level of HA, you need to have at least two of the Instances (VM's) running. This makes sense, but you might assume that the vendor just takes care of that for you - they don't. If a single VM goes down (for whatever reason) then the access to it is lost. Depending on multiple factors, you might be able to recover the data, but you should assume that you can't. You should keep a sync to another location (perhaps the vendor's storage system in another geographic datacenter or to a local location) to ensure you can continue to serve your clients. You'll also need to host the same VM's in another geographical location. Everything from a vendor outage to a network path problem could prevent your users from reaching the system, so you need to have multiple locations to handle this. This means that you'll have to figure out how to manage state between the geo's. If the system goes down in the middle of a transaction, you need to figure out what part of the process the system was in, and then re-create or transfer that state to the second set of systems. If you didn't write the software yourself, this is non-trivial. You'll also need a manual or automatic process to detect the failure and re-route the traffic to your secondary location. You could flip a DNS entry (if your application can tolerate that) or invoke another process to alias the first system to the second, such as load-balancing and so on. There are many options, but all of them involve coding the state into the application layer. If you've simply moved a state-ful application to VM's, you may not be able to easily implement an HA solution. Planning for HA in PaaS Implementing HA in PaaS is a bit simpler, since it's built on the concept of stateless applications deployment. Once again, you need at least two copies of each element in the solution (web roles, worker roles, etc.) to remain available in a single datacenter. Also, you need to deploy the application again in a separate geo, but the advantage here is that you could work out a "shared storage" model such that state is auto-balanced across the world. In fact, you don't have to maintain a "DR" site, the alternate location can be live and serving clients, and only take on extra load if the other site is not available. In Windows Azure, you can use the Traffic Manager service top route the requests as a type of auto balancer. Even with these benefits, I recommend a second backup of storage in another geographic location. Storage is inexpensive; and that second copy can be used for not only HA but DR. Planning for HA in SaaS In Software-as-a-Service (such as Office 365, or Hadoop in Windows Azure) You have far less control over the HA solution, although you still maintain the responsibility to ensure you have it. Since each SaaS is different, check with the vendor on the solution for HA - and make sure you understand what they do and what you are responsible for. They may have no HA for that solution, or pin it to a particular geo, or perhaps they have a massive HA built in with automatic load balancing (which is often the case).   All of these options (with the exception of SaaS) involve higher costs for the design. Do not sacrifice reliability for cost - that will always cost you more in the end. Build in the redundancy and HA at the very outset of the project - if you try to tack it on later in the process the business will push back and potentially not implement HA. References: http://www.bing.com/search?q=windows+azure+High+Availability  (each type of implementation is different, so I'm routing you to a search on the topic - look for the "Patterns and Practices" results for the area in Azure you're interested in)

    Read the article

  • SOA, Governance, and Drugs

    Why is IT governance important in service oriented architecture (SOA)? IT Governance provides a framework for making appropriate decisions based on company guidelines and accepted standards. This framework also outlines each stakeholder’s responsibilities and authority when making important architectural or design decisions. Furthermore, this framework of governance defines parameters and constraints that are used to give context and perspective when making decisions. The use of governance as it applies to SOA ensures that specific design principles and patterns are used when developing and maintaining services. When governance is consistently applied systems the following benefits are achieved according to Anne Thomas Manes in 2010. Governance makes sure that services conform to standard interface patterns, common data modeling practices, and promotes the incorporation of existing system functionality by building on top of other available services across a system. Governance defines development standards based on proven design principles and patterns that promote reuse and composition. Governance provides developers a set of proven design principles, standards and practices that promote the reduction in system based component dependencies.  By following these guidelines, individual components will be easier to maintain. For me personally, I am a fan of IT governance, and feel that it valuable part of any corporate IT department. However, depending on how it is implemented can really affect the value of using IT governance.  Companies need to find a way to ensure that governance does not become extreme in its policies and procedures. I know for me personally, I would really dislike working under a completely totalitarian or laissez-faire version of governance. Developers need to be able to be creative in their designs and too much governance can really impede the design process and prevent the most optimal design from being developed. On the other hand, with no governance enforced, no standards will be followed and accepted design patterns will be ignored. I have personally had to spend a lot of time working on this particular scenario and I have found that the concept of code reuse and composition is almost nonexistent.  Based on this, too much time and money is wasted on redeveloping existing aspects of an application that already exist within the system as a whole. I think moving forward we will see a staggered form of IT governance, regardless if it is for SOA or IT in general.  Depending on the size of a company and the size of its IT department,  I can see IT governance as a layered approach in that the top layer will be defined by enterprise architects that focus on abstract concepts pertaining to high level design, general  guidelines, acceptable best practices, and recommended design patterns.  The next layer will be defined by solution architects or department managers that further expand on abstracted guidelines defined by the enterprise architects. This layer will contain further definitions as to when various design patterns, coding standards, and best practices are to be applied based on the context of the solutions that are being developed by the department. The final layer will be defined by the system designer or a solutions architect assed to a project in that they will define what design patterns will be used in a solution, naming conventions, as well as outline how a system will function based on the best practices defined by the previous layers. This layered approach allows for IT departments to be flexible in that system designers have creative leeway in designing solutions to meet the needs of the business, but they must operate within the confines of the abstracted IT governance guidelines.  A real world example of this can be seen in the United States as it pertains to governance of the people in that the US government defines rules and regulations in the abstract and then the state governments take these guidelines and applies them based on the will of the people in each individual state. Furthermore, the county or city governments are the ones that actually enforce these rules based on how they are interpreted by local community.  To further define my example, the United States government defines that marijuana is illegal. Each individual state has the option to determine this regulation as it wishes in that the state of Florida determines that all uses of the drug are illegal, but the state of California legally allows the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes only. Based on these accepted practices each local government enforces these rules in that a police officer will arrest anyone in the state of Florida for having this drug on them if they walk down the street, but in California if a person has a medical prescription for the drug they will not get arrested.  REFERENCESThomas Manes, Anne. (2010). Understanding SOA Governance: http://www.soamag.com/I40/0610-2.php

    Read the article

  • Plagued by multithreaded bugs

    - by koncurrency
    On my new team that I manage, the majority of our code is platform, TCP socket, and http networking code. All C++. Most of it originated from other developers that have left the team. The current developers on the team are very smart, but mostly junior in terms of experience. Our biggest problem: multi-threaded concurrency bugs. Most of our class libraries are written to be asynchronous by use of some thread pool classes. Methods on the class libraries often enqueue long running taks onto the thread pool from one thread and then the callback methods of that class get invoked on a different thread. As a result, we have a lot of edge case bugs involving incorrect threading assumptions. This results in subtle bugs that go beyond just having critical sections and locks to guard against concurrency issues. What makes these problems even harder is that the attempts to fix are often incorrect. Some mistakes I've observed the team attempting (or within the legacy code itself) includes something like the following: Common mistake #1 - Fixing concurrency issue by just put a lock around the shared data, but forgetting about what happens when methods don't get called in an expected order. Here's a very simple example: void Foo::OnHttpRequestComplete(statuscode status) { m_pBar->DoSomethingImportant(status); } void Foo::Shutdown() { m_pBar->Cleanup(); delete m_pBar; m_pBar=nullptr; } So now we have a bug in which Shutdown could get called while OnHttpNetworkRequestComplete is occuring on. A tester finds the bug, captures the crash dump, and assigns the bug to a developer. He in turn fixes the bug like this. void Foo::OnHttpRequestComplete(statuscode status) { AutoLock lock(m_cs); m_pBar->DoSomethingImportant(status); } void Foo::Shutdown() { AutoLock lock(m_cs); m_pBar->Cleanup(); delete m_pBar; m_pBar=nullptr; } The above fix looks good until you realize there's an even more subtle edge case. What happens if Shutdown gets called before OnHttpRequestComplete gets called back? The real world examples my team has are even more complex, and the edge cases are even harder to spot during the code review process. Common Mistake #2 - fixing deadlock issues by blindly exiting the lock, wait for the other thread to finish, then re-enter the lock - but without handling the case that the object just got updated by the other thread! Common Mistake #3 - Even though the objects are reference counted, the shutdown sequence "releases" it's pointer. But forgets to wait for the thread that is still running to release it's instance. As such, components are shutdown cleanly, then spurious or late callbacks are invoked on an object in an state not expecting any more calls. There are other edge cases, but the bottom line is this: Multithreaded programming is just plain hard, even for smart people. As I catch these mistakes, I spend time discussing the errors with each developer on developing a more appropriate fix. But I suspect they are often confused on how to solve each issue because of the enormous amount of legacy code that the "right" fix will involve touching. We're going to be shipping soon, and I'm sure the patches we're applying will hold for the upcoming release. Afterwards, we're going to have some time to improve the code base and refactor where needed. We won't have time to just re-write everything. And the majority of the code isn't all that bad. But I'm looking to refactor code such that threading issues can be avoided altogether. One approach I am considering is this. For each significant platform feature, have a dedicated single thread where all events and network callbacks get marshalled onto. Similar to COM apartment threading in Windows with use of a message loop. Long blocking operations could still get dispatched to a work pool thread, but the completion callback is invoked on on the component's thread. Components could possibly even share the same thread. Then all the class libraries running inside the thread can be written under the assumption of a single threaded world. Before I go down that path, I am also very interested if there are other standard techniques or design patterns for dealing with multithreaded issues. And I have to emphasize - something beyond a book that describes the basics of mutexes and semaphores. What do you think? I am also interested in any other approaches to take towards a refactoring process. Including any of the following: Literature or papers on design patterns around threads. Something beyond an introduction to mutexes and semaphores. We don't need massive parallelism either, just ways to design an object model so as to handle asynchronous events from other threads correctly. Ways to diagram the threading of various components, so that it will be easy to study and evolve solutions for. (That is, a UML equivalent for discussing threads across objects and classes) Educating your development team on the issues with multithreaded code. What would you do?

    Read the article

  • Good or Bad experiences with CryptoLicensing?

    - by dr. evil
    I'm planning to buy CryptoLicensing but before buying it I'd like to get some feedbacks if anyone tried it before. Also it'd be interesting if anyone cracked it or spotted an easy hack against it. I've seen some other SO questions regarding the choosing a .NET licensing component but if you currently happy with another component it'd be nice to hear your experience. It's just quite hard to nail this without going through a long trial.

    Read the article

  • Facebook Game Development - .NET - Which architecture?

    - by Ben
    I am starting to develop a facebook game using ASP.NET + Silverlight Which architecture would you use? ASP.NET MVC or MVVM or RIA Services? ALso what do you think about using XNA with Silversprite? The game won't be a arcade game. It will be more strategy/RPG. Thanks a lot in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to add marker to rich:gmap component?

    - by ortho
    Hi everyone, I can see that I cannot specify the gmap marker in atribute.. I suppose that I need to use a4j function inside this tag. The problem is that I am complete newbie to this stuff... Could anyone tell me how to do this? step by step solution would be greatly appreciated... I have api key and map component (worked with lat and lng, zoom, etc) but need to leave a marker in the center of the map...

    Read the article

  • Myfaces extensionfilter overriding renderkit? (Tree2 component)

    - by Mike
    I've pulled in the tree2 component (from Tomahawk 1.1.9). Had used the simpler Tree component on previous projects, and this one just looks a bit nicer. Running on websphere 6.1.x and set the server side flag that's needed (com.ibm.ws.webcontainer.invokefilterscompatibility=true) and set the extensionfilter accordingly. Everything's good, and works as expected. Here's the issue: - on a page being included on this one (just some typical footer type info with NO myfaces widgets), there's some embedded html that's getting flagged with warnings in the systemout console). These look like org.apache.myfaces.renderkit.html.util.ReducedHTMLParser parse Invalid tag found: unexpected input while looking for attr name or '/' at line 475. Surroundings: 'span id="tile:footr:viewFragm'. org.apache.myfaces.renderkit.html.util.ReducedHTMLParser parse Invalid tag found: unexpected input while looking for attr name or '/' at line 479. Surroundings: 'a id="tile:footr:viewFragment'. org.apache.myfaces.renderkit.html.util.ReducedHTMLParser parse Invalid tag found: unexpected input while looking for attr name or '/' at line 492. Surroundings: 'a id="tile:footr:viewFragment'. The problem isn't necessarily with the html (which should be cleaned up regardless :-). IF I don't include myfaces, I don't get these warning messages with the default ibm jsf renderer (using jsf 1.1 still). Obviously, IBM's implementation is a bit more lax than myFaces. The page has nothing to do with myfaces at all. The reason for needing the extension filter is that it needs (for the Tree2 anyways, I know it does more for file upload) to intercept requests and then stick some .js includes on the page. Investigated this a bit, and I've included this filter in my web.xml, but it is NO longer fronting the faces servlet. So, the filter is instantiated at startup, but is never executed. Since the filter isn't in place, I've had to hard code in the includes for the 2 .js files into my page Now, the tree2 gets rendered properly, AND I'm not getting the warnings from above, because with the extentionfilter not being called, its using the IBM renderkit ;-) I'm a bit concerned that when the extension filter is in place, everything is being rendered by myFaces, rather than IBM's renderkit (i.e. All I want is myfaces/tomahawk to render the tree2 only, and let the ri do everything else) Can anyone confirm this? When you use myfaces/tomahawk, is it doing all the rendering for the whole application, or just the page any tomahawk widget is on? Thanks for any thoughts on this mike

    Read the article

  • Dynamic tab width in a Flex 4 TabBar component with skin

    - by JoriDor
    Hi, I have a Flex 4 TabBar component with a custom skin. In this skin, the item renderer is defined with an ButtonBarButton with a custom skin. All the tabs in the itemrenderer have now the same width. The client however wants me to make the tabs width dynamically, so a smaller tab for a smaller label, a bigger one for a long label. Does anybody know how to adjust the width of Tab (ButtonBarButton)? Thanks a million!

    Read the article

  • .NETCF Component that allows entering a signature

    - by Vaccano
    I need a component that will allow me to enter a signature on a Windows Mobile 5 device. I need to integrate it into my .NETCF program. I would prefer it be free (getting budget approval takes so long). (I have seen the "for pay" one by Resco.) I would need to end up storing the signature in a SQL Server database (it has to be able to serialize). If anyone has any suggestions I would love to hear them.

    Read the article

  • NVIDIA CUDA SDK Examples Compilation Unsupported Architecture 'computer_20'

    - by Andrew Bolster
    On compilation of the CUDA SDK, I'm getting a nvcc fatal : Unsupported gpu architecture 'compute_20' My toolkit is 2.3 and on a shared system (i.e cant really upgrade) and the driver version is also 2.3, running on 4 Tesla C1060s If it helps, the problem is being called in radixsort. It appears that a few people online have had this problem but i havent found anywhere that actually gives a solution.

    Read the article

  • Component-Information from JAR-File possible?

    - by dmtg
    I would like to set up a web application with good modularity and would like to use an AJAX Toolkit/Framework like GWT or ZK for its VIEW. Component information should be load from various modules-JAR. Which AJAX Toolkit/Framework is able to do this?

    Read the article

  • .NET photo processing component

    - by John Williams
    Hi folks! I'm looking for a .NET image processing component or an open source alternative to automate the following tasks: Photo capture (webcams and photo cameras) Photo printing (grid/strip modes) Applying photo effects Saving photos AtalaSoft DotImage is quite expensive, any other suggestions are welcome. Thanks J

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >