Search Results

Search found 14942 results on 598 pages for 'dependency management'.

Page 45/598 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • Software Architecture and MEF composition location

    - by Leonardo
    Introduction My software (a bunch of webapi's) consist of 4 projects: Core, FrontWebApi, Library and Administration. Library is a code library project that consists of only interfaces and enumerators. All my classes in other projects inherit from at least one interface, and this interface is in the library. Generally speaking, my interfaces define either Entities, Repositories or Controllers. This project references no other project or any special dlls... just the regular .Net stuff... Core is a class-library project where concrete implementation of Entities and Repositories. In some cases i have more than 1 implementation for a Repository (ex: one for azure table storage and one for regular Sql). This project handles the intelligence (business rules mostly) and persistence, and it references only the Library. FrontWebApi is a ASP.NET MVC 4 WebApi project that implements the controllers interfaces to handle web-requests (from a mobile native app)... It references the Core and the Library. Administration is a code-library project that represents a "optional-module", meaning: if it is present, it provides extra-features (such as Access Control Lists) to the application, but if its not, no problem. Administration is also only referencing the Library and implementing concrete classes of a few interfaces such as "IAccessControlEntry"... I intend to make this available with a "setup" that will create any required database table or anything like that. But it is important to notice that the Core has no reference to this project... Development Now, in order to have a decoupled code I decide to use IoC and because this is a small project, I decided to do it using MEF, specially because of its advertised "composition" capabilities. I arranged all the imports/exports and constructors and everything, but something is quite not perfect in my "mental-visualisation": Main Question Where should I "Compose" the objects? I mean: Technically, the only place where real implementation access is required is in the Repositories, because in order to retrieve data from wherever, entities instances will be necessary, and in all other places. The repositories could also provide a public "GetCleanInstanceOf()" right? Then all other places will be just fine working with the interfaces instead of concrete classes... Secondary Question Should "Administration" implement the concrete object for "IAccessControlGeneralRepository" or the Core should?

    Read the article

  • Difference between spring setter and interface injection?

    - by Satish Pandey
    I know how constructor and setter injection works in spring. Normally I use interfaces instead of classes to inject beans using setter and I consider it as interface injection, but in case of constructor we also use interfaces (I am confused). In following example I use JobProcessor interface instead of JobProcessorImpl class. public class JobScheduler { // JobProcessor interface private JobProcessor jobProcessor; // Dependecy injection public void setJobProcessor(JobProcessor jobProcessor){ this.jobProcessor = jobProcessor; } } I tried to find a solution by googling but there are different opinions by writers. Even some people says that spring doesn't support interface injection in their blogs/statements. Can someone help me by example?

    Read the article

  • The Business Case for a Platform Approach

    - by Naresh Persaud
    Most customers have assembled a collection of Identity Management products over time, as they have reacted to industry regulations, compliance mandates and security threats, typically selecting best of breed products.  The resulting infrastructure is a patchwork of systems that has served the short term IDM goals, but is overly complex, hard to manage and cannot scale to meets the needs of the future social/mobile enterprise. The solution is to rethink Identity Management as a Platform, rather than individual products. Aberdeen Research has shown that taking a vendor integrated platform approach to Identity Management can reduce cost, make your IT organization more responsive to the needs of a changing business environment, and reduce audit deficiencies.  View the slide show below to see how companies like Agilent, Cisco, ING Bank and Toyota have all built the business case and embraced the Oracle Identity Management Platform approach. Biz case-keynote-final copy View more PowerPoint from OracleIDM

    Read the article

  • Partner Blog Series: PwC Perspectives - Looking at R2 for Customer Organizations

    - by Tanu Sood
    Welcome to the first of our partner blog series. November Mondays are all about PricewaterhouseCoopers' perespective on Identity and R2. In this series, we have identity management experts from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) share their perspective on (and experiences with) the recent identity management release, Oracle Identity Management R2. The purpose of the series is to discuss real world identity use cases that helped shape the innovations in the recent R2 release and the implementation strategies that customers are employing today with expertise from PwC. Part 1: Looking at R2 for Customer Organizations In this inaugural post, we will discuss some of the new features of the R2 release of Oracle Identity Manager that some of our customer organizations are implementing today and the business rationale for those. Oracle's R2 Security portfolio represents a solid step forward for a platform that is already market-leading.  Prior to R2, Oracle was an industry titan in security with reliable products, expansive compatibility, and a large customer base.  Oracle has taken their identity platform to the next level in their latest version, R2.  The new features include a customizable UI, a request catalog, flexible security, and enhancements for its connectors, and more. Oracle customers will be impressed by the new Oracle Identity Manager (OIM) business-friendly UI.  Without question, Oracle has invested significant time in responding to customer feedback about making access requests and related activities easier for non-IT users.  The flexibility to add information to screens, hide fields that are not important to a particular customer, and adjust web themes to suit a company's preference make Oracle's Identity Manager stand out among its peers.  Customers can also expect to carry UI configurations forward with minimal migration effort to future versions of OIM.  Oracle's flexible UI will benefit many organizations looking for a customized feel with out-of-the-box configurations. Organizations looking to extend their services to end users will benefit significantly from new usability features like OIM’s ‘Catalog.’  Customers familiar with Oracle Identity Analytics' 'Glossary' feature will be able to relate to the concept.  It will enable Roles, Entitlements, Accounts, and Resources to be requested through the out-of-the-box UI.  This is an industry-changing feature as customers can make the process to request access easier than ever.  For additional ease of use, Oracle has introduced a shopping cart style request interface that further simplifies the experience for end users.  Common requests can be setup as profiles to save time.  All of this is combined with the approval workflow engine introduced in R1 that provides the flexibility customers need to meet their compliance requirements. Enhanced security was also on the list of features Oracle wanted to deliver to its customers.  The new end-user UI provides additional granular access controls.  Common Help Desk use cases can be implemented with ease by updating the application profiles.  Access can be rolled out so that administrators can only manage a certain department or organization.  Further, OIM can be more easily configured to select which fields can be read-only vs. updated.  Finally, this security model can be used to limit search results for roles and entitlements intended for a particular department.  Every customer has a different need for access and OIM now matches this need with a flexible security model. One of the important considerations when selecting an Identity Management platform is compatibility.  The number of supported platform connectors and how well it can integrate with non-supported platforms is a key consideration for selecting an identity suite.  Oracle has a long list of supported connectors.  When a customer has a requirement for a platform not on that list, Oracle has a solution too.  Oracle is introducing a simplified architecture called Identity Connector Framework (ICF), which holds the potential to simplify custom connectors.  Finally, Oracle has introduced a simplified process to profile new disconnected applications from the web browser.  This is a useful feature that enables administrators to profile applications quickly as well as empowering the application owner to fulfill requests from their web browser.  Support will still be available for connectors based on previous versions in R2. Oracle Identity Manager's new R2 version has delivered many new features customers have been asking for.  Oracle has matured their platform with R2, making it a truly distinctive platform among its peers. In our next post, expect a deep dive into use cases for a customer considering R2 as their new Enterprise identity solution. In the meantime, we look forward to hearing from you about the specific challenges you are facing and your experience in solving those. Meet the Writers Dharma Padala is a Director in the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  He has been implementing medium to large scale Identity Management solutions across multiple industries including utility, health care, entertainment, retail and financial sectors.   Dharma has 14 years of experience in delivering IT solutions out of which he has been implementing Identity Management solutions for the past 8 years. Scott MacDonald is a Director in the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  He has consulted for several clients across multiple industries including financial services, health care, automotive and retail.   Scott has 10 years of experience in delivering Identity Management solutions. John Misczak is a member of the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  He has experience implementing multiple Identity and Access Management solutions, specializing in Oracle Identity Manager and Business Process Engineering Language (BPEL). Jenny (Xiao) Zhang is a member of the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  She has consulted across multiple industries including financial services, entertainment and retail. Jenny has three years of experience in delivering IT solutions out of which she has been implementing Identity Management solutions for the past one and a half years. Praveen Krishna is a Manager in the Advisory  Security practice within PwC.  Over the last decade Praveen has helped clients plan, architect and implement Oracle identity solutions across diverse industries.  His experience includes delivering security across diverse topics like network, infrastructure, application and data where he brings a holistic point of view to problem solving.

    Read the article

  • Master Data Management Update

    Oracle's Master Data Management suite has seen remarkable development progress in the past year and a half. Leveraging out-of-the-box integration to applications provided by Application Integration Architecture, the cost, risk and time it takes to implement an MDM solution has been cut in half. Oracle Applications are now 'MDM Aware', Data Quality tools have reached state-of-the-art status, and new hubs are coming on line. In this AppsCast, Pascal Laik, VP MDM Products discusses this progress, what it means for Oracle customers, and where we are going from here.

    Read the article

  • How to make sure you see the truth with Management Studio

    - by fatherjack
    LiveJournal Tags: TSQL,How To,SSMS,Tips and Tricks Did you know that SQL Server Management Studio can mislead you with how your code is performing? I found a query that was using a scalar function to return a date and wanted to take the opportunity to remove it in favour of a table valued function that would be more efficient. The original function was simply returning the start date of the current financial year. The code we were using was: ALTER  FUNCTION...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Ninject/DI: How to correctly pass initialisation data to injected type at runtime

    - by MrLane
    I have the following two classes: public class StoreService : IStoreService { private IEmailService _emailService; public StoreService(IEmailService emailService) { _emailService = emailService; } } public class EmailService : IEmailService { } Using Ninject I can set up bindings no problem to get it to inject a concrete implementation of IEmailService into the StoreService constructor. StoreService is actually injected into the code behind of an ASP.NET WebForm as so: [Ninject.Inject] public IStoreService StoreService { get; set; } But now I need to change EmailService to accept an object that contains SMTP related settings (that are pulled from the ApplicationSettings of the Web.config). So I changed EmailService to now look like this: public class EmailService : IEmailService { private SMTPSettings _smtpSettings; public void SetSMTPSettings(SMTPSettings smtpSettings) { _smtpSettings = smtpSettings; } } Setting SMTPSettings in this way also requires it to be passed into StoreService (via another public method). This has to be done in the Page_Load method in the WebForms code behind (I only have access to the Settings class in the UI layer). With manual/poor mans DI I could pass SMTPSettings directly into the constructor of EmailService and then inject EmailService into the StoreService constructor. With Ninject I don't have access to the instances of injected types outside of the objects they are injected to, so I have to set their data AFTER Ninject has already injected them via a separate public setter method. This to me seems wrong. How should I really be solving this scenario?

    Read the article

  • This Week on the Green Data Center Management Front

    Among the big news this week in green data center management: Equinix was granted LEED certification for its 2009 retrofit of its Silicon Valley SV2 International Business Exchange facility, Neuwing Energy Ventures announced it successfully registered the first voluntary Energy Efficiency Certificates in the newly launched APX North American Renewables Registry, and more.

    Read the article

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