Search Results

Search found 6226 results on 250 pages for 'enterprise visualization'.

Page 62/250 | < Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >

  • Change authentication wifi WPA to WEP on Windows 8

    - by Kites
    I use netsh wlan set hostednetwork mode=allow ssid=Kites key=phambaoViet netsh wlan start hostednetwork To share WiFi from LAN network on laptop (Windows 8) to my other device. When I show information netsh wlan show hostednetwork the supported authentication is WPA. My device support authentication WEP only. How can I change the authentication to WEP? Infomation: Interface name: Wi-Fi Driver : Qualcomm Atheros AR9002WB-1NG Wireless Network A dapter Vendor : Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc. Provider : Microsoft Date : 03/07/2012 Version : 3.0.0.130 INF file : C:\Windows\INF\netathrx.inf Files : 2 total C:\Windows\system32\DRIVERS\athrx.sys C:\Windows\system32\drivers\vwifibus.sys Type : Native Wi-Fi Driver Radio types supported : 802.11b 802.11g 802.11n FIPS 140-2 mode supported : Yes 802.11w Management Frame Protection supported : Yes Hosted network supported : Yes Authentication and cipher supported in infrastructure mode: Open None Open WEP-40bit Open WEP-104bit Open WEP WPA-Enterprise TKIP WPA-Personal TKIP WPA2-Enterprise TKIP WPA2-Personal TKIP Vendor defined TKIP WPA2-Enterprise Vendor defined Vendor defined Vendor defined WPA-Enterprise CCMP WPA-Personal CCMP WPA2-Enterprise CCMP Vendor defined CCMP WPA2-Enterprise Vendor defined Vendor defined Vendor defined WPA2-Personal CCMP Vendor defined Vendor defined Authentication and cipher supported in ad-hoc mode: Open None Open WEP-40bit Open WEP-104bit Open WEP WPA2-Personal CCMP Vendor defined Vendor defined

    Read the article

  • How can I start hostednetwork on Windows 7?

    - by Pirozek
    When I type in admin console command to start hostednetwork netsh wlan start hostednetwork it gives me this: The hosted network couldn't be started. The group or resource is not in the correct state to perform the requested operation. There is a hotfix from Microsoft but it didn't help me. Any advice? C:\Users\Pirozek>netsh wlan show driver Interface name: Wireless Network Connection 3 Driver : D-Link AirPlus DWL-G520 Wireless PCI Adapter(rev .B) Vendor : Atheros Communications Inc. Provider : Atheros Communications Inc. Date : 8.7.2009 Version : 8.0.0.171 INF file : C:\Windows\INF\oem108.inf Files : 2 total C:\Windows\system32\DRIVERS\athrx.sys C:\Windows\system32\drivers\vwifibus.sys Type : Native Wi-Fi Driver Radio types supported : 802.11b 802.11g FIPS 140-2 mode supported : Yes Hosted network supported : Yes Authentication and cipher supported in infrastructure mode: Open None Open WEP-40bit Shared WEP-40bit Open WEP-104bit Shared WEP-104bit Open WEP Shared WEP WPA-Enterprise TKIP WPA-Personal TKIP WPA2-Enterprise TKIP WPA2-Personal TKIP Vendor defined TKIP WPA2-Enterprise Vendor defined Vendor defined Vendor defined WPA-Enterprise CCMP WPA-Personal CCMP WPA2-Enterprise CCMP Vendor defined CCMP WPA2-Enterprise Vendor defined Vendor defined Vendor defined WPA2-Personal CCMP Authentication and cipher supported in ad-hoc mode: Open None Open WEP-40bit Open WEP-104bit Open WEP WPA2-Personal CCMP

    Read the article

  • Oracle AutoVue Key Highlights from Oracle OpenWorld 2012

    - by Celine Beck
    We closed another successful Oracle Open World for AutoVue. Thanks to everyone who joined us this year. As usual, from customer presentations to evening networking activities, there was enough to keep us busy during the entire event. Here is a summary of some of the key highlights of the conference: Sessions:We had two AutoVue-specific sessions during Oracle Open World this year. The first session was part of the Product Lifecycle Management track and covered how AutoVue can be used to help drive effective decision making and streamline design for manufacturing processes. Attendees had the opportunity to learn from customer speaker GLOBALFOUNDRIES how they have been leveraging Oracle AutoVue within Agile PLM to enable high degree of collaboration during the exceptionally creative phases of their product development processes, securely, without risking valuable intellectual property. If you are interested, you can actually download the presentation by visiting launch.oracle.com/?plmopenworld2012.AutoVue was also featured as part of the Utilities track. This session focused on how visualization solutions play a critical role in effective plant optimization and configuration strategies defined by owners and operators of power generation facilities. Attendees learnt how integrated with document management systems, and enterprise applications like Oracle Primavera and Asset Lifecycle Management, AutoVue improves change management processes; minimizes risks by providing access to accurate engineering drawings which capture and reflect the as-maintained status of assets; and allows customers to drive complex maintenance projects to successful completion.Augmented Business Visualization for Agile PLMDuring Oracle Open World, we also showcased an Augmented Business Visualization-based solution for Oracle Agile PLM. An Augmented Business Visualization (ABV) solution is one where your structured data (from Oracle Agile PLM for instance) and your unstructured data (documents, designs, 3D models, etc) come together to allow you to make better decisions (check out our blog posts on the topic: Augment the Value of Your Data (or Time to replace the “attach” button) and Context is Everything ). As part of the Agile PLM, the idea is to support more effective decision-making by turning 3D assemblies into color-coded reports, and streamlining business processes like Engineering Change Management by enabling the automatic creation of engineering change requests in Agile PLM directly from documents being viewed in AutoVue. More on this coming soon...probably during the Oracle Value Chain Summit to be held in San Francisco, from Feb. 4-6, 2013 in San Francisco! Mark your calendars and stay tuned for more information! And thanks again for joining us at Oracle OpenWorld!

    Read the article

  • Now Shipping! NetAdvantage for .NET 2010 Volume 3!

    The new NetAdvantage Ultimate includes all four Line of Business user interface control sets for ASP .NET, Windows Forms, WPF and Silverlight plus two advanced Data Visualization UI control sets for WPF and Silverlight. With six NetAdvantage products in one robust package, Infragistics® gives you hundreds of controls and infinite development possibilities. Unified XAML Product Strategy-Share Code, Get More Controls In the 10.3 release, Infragistics continues to deliver code parity between the XAML platforms, WPF and Silverlight. In the line of business toolsets, Infragistics introduces the new xamSchedule™, full-featured, Outlook® 2010-style schedule controls, and the new xamDataTree™, a data bound tree view that comfortably handles tens of thousands of tree nodes. Mimicking our Silverlight Drag and Drop Framework, the WPF Drag and Drop Framework CTP empowers you to add your own rich touches to your applications. Track Users' Behaviors New to all NetAdvantage Silverlight controls is the Infragistics Analytics Framework (IGAF), which empowers you to track user behavior in RIAs running on Silverlight 4. Building on the Microsoft® Silverlight Analytics Framework, with IGAF you can analyze the user's behaviors to ensure the experience you want to deliver. NetAdvantage for Windows Forms--New Office® 2010 Ribbon and Application Menu 2010 Create new experiences with Windows Forms. Now with Office 2010 styling, NetAdvantage for Windows Forms has new features such as Microsoft® Office 2010 ribbon and enhanced Infragistics.Excel to export the contents of the high performance WinGrid™ into Microsoft Excel® 2010. The new Windows Message Support enables Infragistics standalone editor controls to process numerous Windows® OS messages, allowing them to respond just like native controls to changes in the Windows environment. Create Faster Web 2.0 Experiences with NetAdvantage for ASP .NET Infragistics continues to push the envelope to deliver the fastest ASP .NET WebForms controls available on the market. Our lightning fast ASP .NET grids are now enhanced with XPS/PDF Exporting and Summary Rows. This release also includes support for jQuery Templating (as a CTP) within our WebDataGrid™ and WebDataTree™ controls allowing you to quickly cut down overall page size. Deliver Business Intelligence with Power, Flexibility and the Office 2010 Experience NetAdvantage for WPF Data Visualization and NetAdvantage for Silverlight Data Visualization help you deliver flexible, powerful and usable end user experiences in Business Intelligence applications. Both suites include the Pivot Grid that delivers the full power of online analytical processing (OLAP) to present multi-dimensional data, sliced and diced in cross-tabulated form for end users to drill down into, interact with and easily extract meaning from the data. Mapping Made Easy 10.3 marks the official release of the WPF Data Visualization xamMap™ control to map anything and everything from geographic to geo-spacial mapping data. Map layers allow you to add successive levels of detail, navigational panes for panning in all directions, color swatch panes that facilitate value scales like Choropleth shading, and scale panes allowing users to zoom-in and out. Both toolsets introduce the first of many relationship maps! With the xamOrgChart™ CTP you can map out organizational charts of up to 50K employees, competitive brackets (think World Cup) and any other relational, organizational map your application needs. http://www.infragistics.com span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Is commented out code really always bad?

    - by nikie
    Practically every text on code quality I've read agrees that commented out code is a bad thing. The usual example is that someone changed a line of code and left the old line there as a comment, apparently to confuse people who read the code later on. Of course, that's a bad thing. But I often find myself leaving commented out code in another situation: I write a computational-geometry or image processing algorithm. To understand this kind of code, and to find potential bugs in it, it's often very helpful to display intermediate results (e.g. draw a set of points to the screen or save a bitmap file). Looking at these values in the debugger usually means looking at a wall of numbers (coordinates, raw pixel values). Not very helpful. Writing a debugger visualizer every time would be overkill. I don't want to leave the visualization code in the final product (it hurts performance, and usually just confuses the end user), but I don't want to loose it, either. In C++, I can use #ifdef to conditionally compile that code, but I don't see much differnce between this: /* // Debug Visualization: draw set of found interest points for (int i=0; i<count; i++) DrawBox(pts[i].X, pts[i].Y, 5,5); */ and this: #ifdef DEBUG_VISUALIZATION_DRAW_INTEREST_POINTS for (int i=0; i<count; i++) DrawBox(pts[i].X, pts[i].Y, 5,5); #endif So, most of the time, I just leave the visualization code commented out, with a comment saying what is being visualized. When I read the code a year later, I'm usually happy I can just uncomment the visualization code and literally "see what's going on". Should I feel bad about that? Why? Is there a superior solution? Update: S. Lott asks in a comment Are you somehow "over-generalizing" all commented code to include debugging as well as senseless, obsolete code? Why are you making that overly-generalized conclusion? I recently read Robert Glass' "Clean Code", which says: Few practices are as odious as commenting-out code. Don't do this!. I've looked at the paragraph in the book again (p. 68), there's no qualification, no distinction made between different reasons for commenting out code. So I wondered if this rule is over-generalizing (or if I misunderstood the book) or if what I do is bad practice, for some reason I didn't know.

    Read the article

  • Catch AutoVue at the COE 2010 PLM Conference

    - by [email protected]
    It's a busy tradeshow season! The AutoVue team will be exhibiting at next week's COE 2010 PLM Conference and Technifair in Las Vegas, NV. This will be a unique opportunity to meet with AutoVue visualization experts and discuss how to leverage visualization throughout your engineering organization to capitalize on product and engineering information to improve business processes, such as design reviews, change management and design revisions. If you plan on attending, be sure to stop by Oracle's AutoVue booth (#508). Click here for more details about the show.

    Read the article

  • Now Shipping! NetAdvantage for .NET 2010 Volume 3!

    The new NetAdvantage Ultimate includes all four Line of Business user interface control sets for ASP .NET, Windows Forms, WPF and Silverlight plus two advanced Data Visualization UI control sets for WPF and Silverlight. With six NetAdvantage products in one robust package, Infragistics® gives you hundreds of controls and infinite development possibilities. Unified XAML Product Strategy-Share Code, Get More Controls In the 10.3 release, Infragistics continues to deliver code parity between the XAML platforms, WPF and Silverlight. In the line of business toolsets, Infragistics introduces the new xamSchedule™, full-featured, Outlook® 2010-style schedule controls, and the new xamDataTree™, a data bound tree view that comfortably handles tens of thousands of tree nodes. Mimicking our Silverlight Drag and Drop Framework, the WPF Drag and Drop Framework CTP empowers you to add your own rich touches to your applications. Track Users' Behaviors New to all NetAdvantage Silverlight controls is the Infragistics Analytics Framework (IGAF), which empowers you to track user behavior in RIAs running on Silverlight 4. Building on the Microsoft® Silverlight Analytics Framework, with IGAF you can analyze the user's behaviors to ensure the experience you want to deliver. NetAdvantage for Windows Forms--New Office® 2010 Ribbon and Application Menu 2010 Create new experiences with Windows Forms. Now with Office 2010 styling, NetAdvantage for Windows Forms has new features such as Microsoft® Office 2010 ribbon and enhanced Infragistics.Excel to export the contents of the high performance WinGrid™ into Microsoft Excel® 2010. The new Windows Message Support enables Infragistics standalone editor controls to process numerous Windows® OS messages, allowing them to respond just like native controls to changes in the Windows environment. Create Faster Web 2.0 Experiences with NetAdvantage for ASP .NET Infragistics continues to push the envelope to deliver the fastest ASP .NET WebForms controls available on the market. Our lightning fast ASP .NET grids are now enhanced with XPS/PDF Exporting and Summary Rows. This release also includes support for jQuery Templating (as a CTP) within our WebDataGrid™ and WebDataTree™ controls allowing you to quickly cut down overall page size. Deliver Business Intelligence with Power, Flexibility and the Office 2010 Experience NetAdvantage for WPF Data Visualization and NetAdvantage for Silverlight Data Visualization help you deliver flexible, powerful and usable end user experiences in Business Intelligence applications. Both suites include the Pivot Grid that delivers the full power of online analytical processing (OLAP) to present multi-dimensional data, sliced and diced in cross-tabulated form for end users to drill down into, interact with and easily extract meaning from the data. Mapping Made Easy 10.3 marks the official release of the WPF Data Visualization xamMap™ control to map anything and everything from geographic to geo-spacial mapping data. Map layers allow you to add successive levels of detail, navigational panes for panning in all directions, color swatch panes that facilitate value scales like Choropleth shading, and scale panes allowing users to zoom-in and out. Both toolsets introduce the first of many relationship maps! With the xamOrgChart™ CTP you can map out organizational charts of up to 50K employees, competitive brackets (think World Cup) and any other relational, organizational map your application needs. http://www.infragistics.com span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Glassfish v3 / JNDI entry cannot be found problems!

    - by REMP
    I've been having problems trying to call an EJB's method from a Java Application Client. Here is the code. EJB Remote Interface package com.test; import javax.ejb.Remote; @Remote public interface HelloBeanRemote { public String sayHello(); } EJB package com.test; import javax.ejb.Stateless; @Stateless (name="HelloBeanExample" , mappedName="ejb/HelloBean") public class HelloBean implements HelloBeanRemote { @Override public String sayHello(){ return "hola"; } } Main class (another project) import com.test.HelloBeanRemote; import javax.naming.Context; import javax.naming.InitialContext; public class Main { public void runTest()throws Exception{ Context ctx = new InitialContext(); HelloBeanRemote bean = (HelloBeanRemote)ctx.lookup("java:global/Test/HelloBeanExample!com.test.HelloBeanRemote"); System.out.println(bean.sayHello()); } public static void main(String[] args)throws Exception { Main main = new Main(); main.runTest(); } } Well, what is my problem? JNDI entry for this EJB cannot be found! java.lang.NullPointerException at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.getRemoteProvider(SerialContext.java:297) at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.getProvider(SerialContext.java:271) at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.lookup(SerialContext.java:430) at javax.naming.InitialContext.lookup(InitialContext.java:392) at testdesktop.Main.runTest(Main.java:22) at testdesktop.Main.main(Main.java:31) Exception in thread "main" javax.naming.NamingException: Lookup failed for 'java:global/Test/HelloBeanExample!com.test.HelloBeanRemote' in SerialContext [Root exception is javax.naming.NamingException: Unable to acquire SerialContextProvider for SerialContext [Root exception is java.lang.NullPointerException]] at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.lookup(SerialContext.java:442) at javax.naming.InitialContext.lookup(InitialContext.java:392) at testdesktop.Main.runTest(Main.java:22) at testdesktop.Main.main(Main.java:31) Caused by: javax.naming.NamingException: Unable to acquire SerialContextProvider for SerialContext [Root exception is java.lang.NullPointerException] at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.getProvider(SerialContext.java:276) at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.lookup(SerialContext.java:430) ... 3 more Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.getRemoteProvider(SerialContext.java:297) at com.sun.enterprise.naming.impl.SerialContext.getProvider(SerialContext.java:271) ... 4 more Java Result: 1 I've trying with different JNDI entries but nothing works (I got this entries from NetBeans console): INFO: Portable JNDI names for EJB HelloBeanExample : [java:global/Test/HelloBeanExample, java:global/Test/HelloBeanExample!com.test.HelloBeanRemote] INFO: Glassfish-specific (Non-portable) JNDI names for EJB HelloBeanExample : [ejb/HelloBean, ejb/HelloBean#com.test.HelloBeanRemote] So I tried with the following entries but I got the same exception : java:global/Test/HelloBeanExample java:global/Test/HelloBeanExample!com.test.HelloBeanRemote ejb/HelloBean ejb/HelloBean#com.test.HelloBeanRemote I'm using Netbeans 6.8 and Glassfish v3!

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Licensing in a VMware vSphere Cluster

    - by Helvick
    If I have SQL Server 2008 instances running in virtual machines on a VMware vSphere cluster with vMotion\DRS enabled so that the VM's can (potentially) run on any one of the physical servers in the cluster what precisely are the license requirements? For example assume that I have 4 physical ESX Hosts with dual physical CPU's and 3 separate single vCPU Virtual Machines running SQL Server 2008 running in that cluster. How many SQL Standard Processor licenses would I need? Is it 3 (one per VM) or 12 (one per VM on each physical host) or something else? How many SQL Enterprise Processor licenses would I need? Is it 3 (one per VM) or 8 (one for each physical CPU in the cluster) or, again, something else? The range in the list prices for these options goes from $17k to $200k so getting it right is quite important. Bonus question: If I choose the Server+CAL licensing model do I need to buy multiple Server instance licenses for each of the ESX hosts (so 12 copies of the SQL Server Standard server license so that there are enough licenses on each host to run all VM's) or again can I just license the VM and what difference would using Enterprise per server licensing make? Edited to Add Having spent some time reading the SQL 2008 Licensing Guide (63 Pages! Includes Maps!*) I've come across this: • Under the Server/CAL model, you may run unlimited instances of SQL Server 2008 Enterprise within the server farm, and move those instances freely, as long as those instances are not running on more servers than the number of licenses assigned to the server farm. • Under the Per Processor model, you effectively count the greatest number of physical processors that may support running instances of SQL Server 2008 Enterprise at any one time across the server farm and assign that number of Processor licenses And earlier: ..For SQL Server, these rule changes apply to SQL Server 2008 Enterprise only. By my reading this means that for my 3 VM's I only need 3 SQL 2008 Enterprise Processor Licenses or one copy of Server Enterprise + CALs for the cluster. By implication it means that I have to license all processors if I choose SQL 2008 Standard Processor licensing or that I have to buy a copy of SQL Server 2008 Standard for each ESX host if I choose to use CALs. *There is a map to demonstrate that a Server Farm cannot extend across an area broader than 3 timezones unless it's in the European Free Trade Area, I wasn't expecting that when I started reading it.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Licensing in a VMware vSphere Cluster

    - by Helvick
    If I have SQL Server 2008 instances running in virtual machines on a VMware vSphere cluster with vMotion\DRS enabled so that the VM's can (potentially) run on any one of the physical servers in the cluster what precisely are the license requirements? For example assume that I have 4 physical ESX Hosts with dual physical CPU's and 3 separate single vCPU Virtual Machines running SQL Server 2008 running in that cluster. How many SQL Standard Processor licenses would I need? Is it 3 (one per VM) or 12 (one per VM on each physical host) or something else? How many SQL Enterprise Processor licenses would I need? Is it 3 (one per VM) or 8 (one for each physical CPU in the cluster) or, again, something else? The range in the list prices for these options goes from $17k to $200k so getting it right is quite important. Bonus question: If I choose the Server+CAL licensing model do I need to buy multiple Server instance licenses for each of the ESX hosts (so 12 copies of the SQL Server Standard server license so that there are enough licenses on each host to run all VM's) or again can I just license the VM and what difference would using Enterprise per server licensing make? Edited to Add Having spent some time reading the SQL 2008 Licensing Guide (63 Pages! Includes Maps!*) I've come across this: • Under the Server/CAL model, you may run unlimited instances of SQL Server 2008 Enterprise within the server farm, and move those instances freely, as long as those instances are not running on more servers than the number of licenses assigned to the server farm. • Under the Per Processor model, you effectively count the greatest number of physical processors that may support running instances of SQL Server 2008 Enterprise at any one time across the server farm and assign that number of Processor licenses And earlier: ..For SQL Server, these rule changes apply to SQL Server 2008 Enterprise only. By my reading this means that for my 3 VM's I only need 3 SQL 2008 Enterprise Processor Licenses or one copy of Server Enterprise + CALs for the cluster. By implication it means that I have to license all processors if I choose SQL 2008 Standard Processor licensing or that I have to buy a copy of SQL Server 2008 Standard for each ESX host if I choose to use CALs. *There is a map to demonstrate that a Server Farm cannot extend across an area broader than 3 timezones unless it's in the European Free Trade Area, I wasn't expecting that when I started reading it.

    Read the article

  • Why should you choose Oracle WebLogic 12c instead of JBoss EAP 6?

    - by Ricardo Ferreira
    In this post, I will cover some technical differences between Oracle WebLogic 12c and JBoss EAP 6, which was released a couple days ago from Red Hat. This article claims to help you in the evaluation of key points that you should consider when choosing for an Java EE application server. In the following sections, I will present to you some important aspects that most customers ask us when they are seriously evaluating for an middleware infrastructure, specially if you are considering JBoss for some reason. I would suggest that you keep the following question in mind while you are reading the points: "Why should I choose JBoss instead of WebLogic?" 1) Multi Datacenter Deployment and Clustering - D/R ("Disaster & Recovery") architecture support is embedded on the WebLogic Server 12c product. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no direct D/R support included, Red Hat relies on third-part tools with higher prices. When you consider a middleware solution to host your business critical application, you should worry with every architectural aspect that are related with the solution. Fail-over support is one little aspect of a truly reliable solution. If you do not worry about D/R, your solution will not be reliable. Having said that, with Red Hat and JBoss EAP 6, you have this extra cost that will increase considerably the total cost of ownership of the solution. As we commonly hear from analysts, open-source are not so cheaper when you start seeing the big picture. - WebLogic Server 12c supports advanced LAN clustering, detection of death servers and have a common alert framework. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has limited LAN clustering support with no server death detection. They do not generate any alerts when servers goes down (only if you buy JBoss ON which is a separated technology, but until now does not support JBoss EAP 6) and manual intervention are required when servers goes down. In most cases, admin people must rely on "kill -9", "tail -f someFile.log" and "ps ax | grep java" commands to manage failures and clustering anomalies. - WebLogic Server 12c supports the concept of Node Manager, which is a separated process that runs on the physical | virtual servers that allows extend the administration of the cluster to WebLogic managed servers that are often distributed across multiple machines and geographic locations. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no equivalent technology. Whole server instances must be managed individually. - WebLogic Server 12c Node Manager supports Coherence to boost performance when managing servers. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no similar technology. There is no way to coordinate JBoss and infiniband instances provided by JBoss using high throughput and low latency protocols like InfiniBand. The Node Manager feature also allows another very important feature that JBoss EAP lacks: secure the administration. When using WebLogic Node Manager, all the administration tasks are sent to the managed servers in a secure tunel protected by a certificate, which means that the transport layer that separates the WebLogic administration console from the managed servers are secured by SSL. - WebLogic Server 12c are now integrated with OTD ("Oracle Traffic Director") which is a web server technology derived from the former Sun iPlanet Web Server. This software complements the web server support offered by OHS ("Oracle HTTP Server"). Using OTD, WebLogic instances are load-balanced by a high powerful software that knows how to handle SDP ("Socket Direct Protocol") over InfiniBand, which boost performance when used with engineered systems technologies like Oracle Exalogic Elastic Cloud. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand only offers support to Apache Web Server with custom modules created to deal with JBoss clusters, but only across standard TCP/IP networks.  2) Application and Runtime Diagnostics - WebLogic Server 12c have diagnostics capabilities embedded on the server called WLDF ("WebLogic Diagnostic Framework") so there is no need to rely on third-part tools. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no diagnostics capabilities. Their only diagnostics tool is the log generated by the application server. Admin people are encouraged to analyse thousands of log lines to find out what is going on. - WebLogic Server 12c complement WLDF with JRockit MC ("Mission Control"), which provides to administrators and developers a complete insight about the JVM performance, behavior and possible bottlenecks. WebLogic Server 12c also have an classloader analysis tool embedded, and even a log analyzer tool that enables administrators and developers to view logs of multiple servers at the same time. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand relies on third-part tools to do something similar. Again, only log searching are offered to find out whats going on. - WebLogic Server 12c offers end-to-end traceability and monitoring available through Oracle EM ("Enterprise Manager"), including monitoring of business transactions that flows through web servers, ESBs, application servers and database servers, all of this with high deep JVM analysis and diagnostics. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand, even using JBoss ON ("Operations Network"), which is a separated technology, does not support those features. Red Hat relies on third-part tools to provide direct Oracle database traceability across JVMs. One of those tools are Oracle EM for non-Oracle middleware that manage JBoss, Tomcat, Websphere and IIS transparently. - WebLogic Server 12c with their JRockit support offers a tool called JRockit Flight Recorder, which can give developers a complete visibility of a certain period of application production monitoring with zero extra overhead. This automatic recording allows you to deep analyse threads latency, memory leaks, thread contention, resource utilization, stack overflow damages and GC ("Garbage Collection") cycles, to observe in real time stop-the-world phenomenons, generational, reference count and parallel collects and mutator threads analysis. JBoss EAP 6 don't even dream to support something similar, even because they don't have their own JVM. 3) Application Server Administration - WebLogic Server 12c offers a complete administration console complemented with scripting and macro-like recording capabilities. A single WebLogic console can managed up to hundreds of WebLogic servers belonging to the same domain. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has a limited console and provides a XML centric administration. JBoss, after ten years, started the development of a rudimentary centralized administration that still leave a lot of administration tasks aside, so admin people and developers must touch scripts and XML configuration files for most advanced and even simple administration tasks. This lead applications to error prone and risky deployments. Even using JBoss ON, JBoss EAP are not able to offer decent administration features for admin people which must be high skilled in JBoss internal architecture and its managing capabilities. - Oracle EM is available to manage multiple domains, databases, application servers, operating systems and virtualization, with a complete end-to-end visibility. JBoss ON does not provide management capabilities across the complete architecture, only basic monitoring. Even deployment must be done aside JBoss ON which does no integrate well with others softwares than JBoss. Until now, JBoss ON does not supports JBoss EAP 6, so even their minimal support for JBoss are not available for JBoss EAP 6 leaving customers uncovered and subject to high skilled JBoss admin people. - WebLogic Server 12c has the same administration model whatever is the topology selected by the customer. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand differentiates between two operational models: standalone-mode and domain-mode, that are not consistent with each other. Depending on the mode used, the administration skill is different. - WebLogic Server 12c has no point-of-failures processes, and it does not need to define any specialized server. Domain model in WebLogic is available for years (at least ten years or more) and is production proven. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand needs special processes to garantee JBoss integrity, the PC ("Process-Controller") and the HC ("Host-Controller"). Different from WebLogic, the domain model in JBoss is quite new (one year at tops) of maturity, and need to mature considerably until start doing things like WebLogic domain model does. - WebLogic Server 12c supports parallel deployment model which enables some artifacts being deployed at the same time. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand does not have any similar feature. Every deployment are done atomically in the containers. This means that if you have a huge EAR (an EAR of 120 MB of size for instance) and deploy onto JBoss EAP 6, this EAR will take some minutes in order to starting accept thread requests. The same EAR deployed onto WebLogic Server 12c will reduce the deployment time at least in 2X compared to JBoss. 4) Support and Upgrades - WebLogic Server 12c has patch management available. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no patch management available, each JBoss EAP instance should be patched manually. To achieve such feature, you need to buy a separated technology called JBoss ON ("Operations Network") that manage this type of stuff. But until now, JBoss ON does not support JBoss EAP 6 so, in practice, JBoss EAP 6 does not have this feature. - WebLogic Server 12c supports previuous WebLogic domains without any reconfiguration since its kernel is robust and mature since its creation in 1995. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has a proven lack of supportability between JBoss AS 4, 5, 6 and 7. Different kernels and messaging engines were implemented in JBoss stack in the last five years reveling their incapacity to create a well architected and proven middleware technology. - WebLogic Server 12c has patch prescription based on customer configuration. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no such capability. People need to create ticket supports and have their installations revised by Red Hat support guys to gain some patch prescription from them. - Oracle WebLogic Server independent of the version has 8 years of support of new patches and has lifetime release of existing patches beyond that. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand provides patches for a specific application server version up to 5 years after the release date. JBoss EAP 4 and previous versions had only 4 years. A good question that Red Hat will argue to answer is: "what happens when you find issues after year 5"?  5) RAC ("Real Application Clusters") Support - WebLogic Server 12c ships with a specific JDBC driver to leverage Oracle RAC clustering capabilities (Fast-Application-Notification, Transaction Affinity, Fast-Connection-Failover, etc). Oracle JDBC thin driver are also available. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand ships only the standard Oracle JDBC thin driver. Load balancing with Oracle RAC are not supported. Manual intervention in case of planned or unplanned RAC downtime are necessary. In JBoss EAP 6, situation does not reestablish automatically after downtime. - WebLogic Server 12c has a feature called Active GridLink for Oracle RAC which provides up to 3X performance on OLTP applications. This seamless integration between WebLogic and Oracle database enable more value added to critical business applications leveraging their investments in Oracle database technology and Oracle middleware. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no performance gains at all, even when admin people implement some kind of connection-pooling tuning. - WebLogic Server 12c also supports transaction and web session affinity to the Oracle RAC, which provides aditional gains of performance. This is particularly interesting if you are creating a reliable solution that are distributed not only in an LAN cluster, but into a different data center. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no such support. 6) Standards and Technology Support - WebLogic Server 12c is fully Java EE 6 compatible and production ready since december of 2011. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand became fully compatible with Java EE 6 only in the community version after three months, and production ready only in a few days considering that this article was written in June of 2012. Red Hat says that they are the masters of innovation and technology proliferation, but compared with Oracle and even other proprietary vendors like IBM, they historically speaking are lazy to deliver the most newest technologies and standards adherence. - Oracle is the steward of Java, driving innovation into the platform from commercial and open-source vendors. Red Hat on the other hand does not have its own JVM and relies on third-part JVMs to complete their application server offer. 95% of Red Hat customers are using Oracle HotSpot as JVM, which means that without Oracle involvement, their support are limited exclusively to the application server layer and we all know that most problems are happens in the JVM layer. - WebLogic Server 12c supports natively JDK 7, which empower developers to explore the maximum of the Java platform productivity when writing code. This feature differentiate WebLogic from others application servers (except GlassFish that are also managed by Oracle) because the usage of JDK 7 introduce such remarkable productivity features like the "try-with-resources" enhancement, catching multiple exceptions with one try block, Strings in the switch statements, JVM improvements in terms of JDBC, I/O, networking, security, concurrency and of course, the most important feature of Java 7: native support for multiple non-Java languages. More features regarding JDK 7 can be found here. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand does not support JDK 7 officially, they comment in their community version that "Java SE 7 can be used with JBoss 7" which does not gives you any guarantees of enterprise support for JDK 7. - Oracle WebLogic Server 12c supports integration with Spring framework allowing Spring applications to use WebLogic special transaction manager, exposing bean interfaces to WebLogic MBeans to take advantage of all WebLogic monitoring and administration advantages. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no special integration with Spring. In fact, Red Hat offers a suspicious package called "JBoss Web Platform" that in theory supports Spring, but in practice this package does not offers any special integration. It is just a facility for Red Hat customers to have support from both JBoss and Spring technology using the same customer support. 7) Lightweight Development - Oracle WebLogic Server 12c and Oracle GlassFish are completely integrated and can share applications without any modifications. Starting with the 12c version, WebLogic now understands natively GlassFish deployment descriptors and specific configurations in order to offer you a truly and reliable migration path from a community Java EE application server to a enterprise middleware product like WebLogic. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no support to natively reuse an existing (or still in development) application from JBoss AS community server. Users of JBoss suffer of critical issues during deployment time that includes: changing the libraries and dependencies of the application, patching the DTD or XSD deployment descriptors, refactoring of the application layers due classloading issues and anomalies, rebuilding of persistence, business and web layers due issues with "usage of the certified version of an certain dependency" or "frameworks that Red Hat potentially does not recommend" etc. If you have the culture or enterprise IT directive of developing Java EE applications using community middleware to in a certain future, transition to enterprise (supported by a vendor) middleware, Oracle WebLogic plus Oracle GlassFish offers you a more sustainable solution. - WebLogic Server 12c has a very light ZIP distribution (less than 165 MB). JBoss EAP 6 ZIP size is around 130 MB, together with JBoss ON you have more 100 MB resulting in a higher download footprint. This is particularly interesting if you plan to use automated setup of application server instances (for example, to rapidly setup a development or staging environment) using Maven or Hudson. - WebLogic Server 12c has a complete integration with Maven allowing developers to setup WebLogic domains with few commands. Tasks like downloading WebLogic, installation, domain creation, data sources deployment are completely integrated. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has a limited offer integration with those tools.  - WebLogic Server 12c has a startup mode called WLX that turns-off EJB, JMS and JCA containers leaving enabled only the web container with Java EE 6 web profile. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no such feature, you need to disable manually the containers that you do not want to use. - WebLogic Server 12c supports fastswap, which enables you to change classes without redeployment. This is particularly interesting if you are developing patches for the application that is already deployed and you do not want to redeploy the entire application. This is the same behavior that most application servers offers to JSP pages, but with WebLogic Server 12c, you have the same feature for Java classes in general. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no such support. Even JBoss EAP 5 does not support this until now. 8) JMS and Messaging - WebLogic Server 12c has a proven and high scalable JMS implementation since its initial release in 1995. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has a still immature technology called HornetQ, which was introduced in JBoss EAP 5 replacing everything that was implemented in the previous versions. Red Hat loves to introduce new technologies across JBoss versions, playing around with customers and their investments. And when they are asked about why they have changed the implementation and caused such a mess, their answer is always: "the previous implementation was inadequate and not aligned with the community strategy so we are creating a new a improved one". This Red Hat practice leads to uncomfortable investments that in a near future (sometimes less than a year) will be affected in someway. - WebLogic Server 12c has troubleshooting and monitoring features included on the WebLogic console and WLDF. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no direct monitoring on the console, activity is reflected only on the logs, no debug logs available in case of JMS issues. - WebLogic Server 12c has extremely good performance and scalability. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has a JMS storage mechanism relying on Oracle database or MySQL. This means that if an issue in production happens and Red Hat affirms that an performance issue is happening due to database problems, they will not support you on the performance issue. They will orient you to call Oracle instead. - WebLogic Server 12c supports messaging enterprise features like SAF ("Store and Forward"), Distributed Queues/Topics and Foreign JMS providers support that leverage JMS implementations without compromise developer code making things completely transparent. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand do not even dream to support such features. 9) Caching and Grid - Coherence, which is the leading and most mature data grid technology from Oracle, is available since early 2000 and was integrated with WebLogic in 2009. Coherence and WebLogic clusters can be both managed from WebLogic administrative console. Even Node Manager supports Coherence. JBoss on the other hand discontinued JBoss Cache, which was their caching implementation just like they did with the messaging implementation (JBossMQ) which was a issue for long term customers. JBoss EAP 6 ships InfiniSpan version 1.0 which is immature and lack a proven record of successful cases and reliability. - WebLogic Server 12c has a feature called ActiveCache which uses Coherence to, without any code changes, replicate HTTP sessions from both WebLogic and other application servers like JBoss, Tomcat, Websphere, GlassFish and even Microsoft IIS. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand does have such support and even when they do in the future, they probably will support only their own application server. - Coherence can be used to manage both L1 and L2 cache levels, providing support to Oracle TopLink and others JPA compliant implementations, even Hibernate. JBoss EAP 6 and Infinispan on the other hand supports only Hibernate. And most important of all: Infinispan does not have any successful case of L1 or L2 caching level support using Hibernate, which lead us to reflect about its viability. 10) Performance - WebLogic Server 12c is certified with Oracle Exalogic Elastic Cloud and can run unchanged applications at this engineered system. This approach can benefit customers from Exalogic optimization's of both kernel and JVM layers to boost performance in terms of 10X for web, OLTP, JMS and grid applications. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no investment on engineered systems: customers do not have the choice to deploy on a Java ultra fast system if their project becomes relevant and performance issues are detected. - WebLogic Server 12c maintains a performance gain across each new release: starting on WebLogic 5.1, the overall performance gain has been close to 4X, which close to a 20% gain release by release. JBoss on the other hand does not provide SPECJAppServer or SPECJEnterprise performance benchmarks. Their so called "performance gains" remains hidden in their customer environments, which lead us to think if it is true or not since we will never get access to those environments. - WebLogic Server 12c has industry performance benchmarks with submissions across platforms and configurations leading SPECJ. Oracle WebLogic leads SPECJAppServer performance in multiple categories, fitting all customer topologies like: dual-node, single-node, multi-node and multi-node with RAC. JBoss... again, does not provide any SPECJAppServer performance benchmarks. - WebLogic Server 12c has a feature called work manager which allows your application to embrace new performance levels based on critical resource utilization of the CPUs usage. Work managers prioritizes work and allocates threads based on an execution model that takes into account administrator-defined parameters and actual run-time performance and throughput. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand has no compared feature and probably they never will. Not supporting such feature like work managers, JBoss EAP 6 forces admin people and specially developers to uncover performance gains in a intrusive way, rewriting the code and doing performance refactorings. 11) Professional Services Support - WebLogic Server 12c and any other technology sold by Oracle give customers the possibility of hire OCS ("Oracle Consulting Services") to manage critical scenarios, deployment assistance of new applications, high skilled consultancy of architecture, best practices and people allocation together with customer teams. All OCS services are available without any restrictions, having the customer bought software from Oracle or just starting their implementation before any acquisition. JBoss EAP 6 or Red Hat to be more specifically, only offers professional services if you buy subscriptions from them. If you are developing a new critical application for your business and need the help of Red Hat for a serious issue or architecture decision, they will probably say: "OK... I can help you but after you buy subscriptions from me". Red Hat also does not allows their professional services consultants to manage environments that uses community based software. They will probably force you to first buy a subscription, download their "enterprise" version and them, optionally hire their consultants. - Oracle provides you our university to educate your team into our technologies, including of course specialized trainings of WebLogic application server. At any time and location, you can hire Oracle to train your team so you get trustful knowledge according to your specific needs. Certifications for the products are also available if your technical people desire to differentiate themselves as professionals. Red Hat on the other hand have a limited pool of resources to train your team in their technologies. Basically they are selling training and certification for RHEL ("Red Hat Enterprise Linux") but if you demand more specialized training in JBoss middleware, they will probably connect you to some "certified" partner localized training since they are apparently discontinuing their education center, at least here in Brazil. They were not able to reproduce their success with RHEL education to their middleware division since they need first sell the subscriptions to after gives you specialized training. And again, they only offer you specialized training based on their enterprise version (EAP in the case of JBoss) which means that the courses will be a quite outdated. There are reports of developers that took official training's from Red Hat at this year (2012) and in a certain JBoss advanced course, Red Hat supposedly covered JBossMQ as the messaging subsystem, and even the printed material provided was based on JBossMQ since the training was created for JBoss EAP 4.3. 12) Encouraging Transparency without Ulterior Motives - WebLogic Server 12c like any other software from Oracle can be downloaded any time from anywhere, you should only possess an OTN ("Oracle Technology Network") credential and you can download any enterprise software how many times you want. And is not some kind of "trial" version. It is the official binaries that will be running for ever in your data center. Oracle does not encourages the usage of "specific versions" of our software. The binaries you buy from Oracle are the same binaries anyone in the world could download and use for testing and personal education. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand are not available for download unless you buy a subscription and get access to the Red Hat enterprise repositories. If you need to test, learn or just start creating your application using Red Hat's middleware software, you should download it from the community website. You are not allowed to download the enterprise version that, according to Red Hat are more secure, reliable and robust. But no one of us want to start the development of a software with an unsecured, unreliable and not scalable middleware right? So what you do? You are "invited" by Red Hat to buy subscriptions from them to get access to the "cool" version of the software. - WebLogic Server 12c prices are publicly available in the Oracle website. If you want to know right now how much WebLogic will cost to your organization, just click here and get access to our price list. In the case of WebLogic, check out the "US Oracle Technology Commercial Price List". Oracle also encourages you to get in touch with a sales representative to discuss discounts that would make possible the investment into our technology. But you are not required to do this, only if you are interested in buying our technology or maybe you want to discuss some discount scenarios. JBoss EAP 6 on the other hand does not have its cost publicly available in Red Hat's website or in any other media, at least is not so easy to get such information. The only link you will possibly find in their website is a "Contact a Sales Representative" link. This is not a very good relationship between an customer and an vendor. This is not an example of transparency, mainly when the software are sold as open. In this situations, customers expects to see the software prices publicly available, so they can have the chance to decide, based on the existing features of the software, if the cost is fair or not. Conclusion Oracle WebLogic is the most mature, secure, reliable and scalable Java EE application server of the market, and have a proven record of success around the globe to prove it's majority. Don't lose the chance to discover today how WebLogic could fit your needs and sustain your global IT middleware strategy, no matter if your strategy are completely based on the Cloud or not.

    Read the article

  • What is the most EVIL code you have ever seen in a production enterprise environment?

    - by Registered User
    What is the most evil or dangerous code fragment you have ever seen in a production environment at a company? I've never encountered production code that I would consider to be deliberately malicious and evil, so I'm quite curious to see what others have found. The most dangerous code I have ever seen was a stored procedure two linked-servers away from our core production database server. The stored procedure accepted any NVARCHAR(8000) parameter and executed the parameter on the target production server via an double-jump sp_executeSQL command. That is to say, the sp_executeSQL command executed another sp_executeSQL command in order to jump two linked servers. Oh, and the linked server account had sysadmin rights on the target production server.

    Read the article

  • Ruby's autoload not working in 1.8.7 or Ruby Enterprise?

    - by webren
    I've written a gem and within a file I am doing this to autoload my main gem logic: $:.push File.expand_path('lib', __FILE__) require "oa-casport/version" require 'omniauth/core' module OmniAuth module Strategies autoload :Casport, 'omniauth/strategies/casport' end end For Ruby versions 1.8.7 and ree, it prints out "no such file to load - omniauth/strategies/casport' But it doesn't print out this message on version 1.9.2. Is there something off with the location of calling autoload? The repo for the gem is located at https://github.com/stevenhaddox/oa-casport

    Read the article

  • mercurial for OS projects and svn for Enterprise projects?

    - by ajsie
    correct me if im wrong, but isn't distributed SCMs for OS projects while centralized SCMs are better for corporate/private projects? cause with eg. mercurial anyone gets an exact copy of the repository with FULL history features, while with centralized you only get the latest working copy. im more focused on private projects so i wonder if its better with centralized SCMs or doesnt it matter?

    Read the article

  • using 3rd party dll in enterprise web based application?

    - by mazhar
    I found a great control with example here for mvc It fulfills all my requirement but the problem is that it uses a js tree dll. Should I go on and used that example in my application? Do you people refrain from using 3rd party free dll in applications? How will I tell that it will not expire or not cause problem later on Forgive me if this is inappropriate question but thx in advance for any appropiate reply on this topic. just trying to get the point of view of you people on this

    Read the article

  • Is there a sqlite entension for PHP in RedHat Enterprise Linux 5?

    - by symcbean
    Hi, I'm trying to use some off-the-shelf PHP code in RHEL5 which requires the sqlite package (not the PDO one) but it appears this is not included in the base php5.1.6 rpm bundled with RHEL5. Unfortunately, due to circumstances beyond my control, I don't have access to the installation media or RHN access (don't ask). There doesn't appear to be such a package in the CENTOS 5 distro either (and I've read that its not in the php-common rpm there either). Any ideas of where I can get this (withuot compiling my own PHP from scratch?) TIA

    Read the article

  • SPARC T3-1 Record Results Running JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Day in the Life Benchmark with Added Batch Component

    - by Brian
    Using Oracle's SPARC T3-1 server for the application tier and Oracle's SPARC Enterprise M3000 server for the database tier, a world record result was produced running the Oracle's JD Edwards EnterpriseOne applications Day in the Life benchmark run concurrently with a batch workload. The SPARC T3-1 server based result has 25% better performance than the IBM Power 750 POWER7 server even though the IBM result did not include running a batch component. The SPARC T3-1 server based result has 25% better space/performance than the IBM Power 750 POWER7 server as measured by the online component. The SPARC T3-1 server based result is 5x faster than the x86-based IBM x3650 M2 server system when executing the online component of the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne 9.0.1 Day in the Life benchmark. The IBM result did not include a batch component. The SPARC T3-1 server based result has 2.5x better space/performance than the x86-based IBM x3650 M2 server as measured by the online component. The combination of SPARC T3-1 and SPARC Enterprise M3000 servers delivered a Day in the Life benchmark result of 5000 online users with 0.875 seconds of average transaction response time running concurrently with 19 Universal Batch Engine (UBE) processes at 10 UBEs/minute. The solution exercises various JD Edwards EnterpriseOne applications while running Oracle WebLogic Server 11g Release 1 and Oracle Web Tier Utilities 11g HTTP server in Oracle Solaris Containers, together with the Oracle Database 11g Release 2. The SPARC T3-1 server showed that it could handle the additional workload of batch processing while maintaining the same number of online users for the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Day in the Life benchmark. This was accomplished with minimal loss in response time. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne 9.0.1 takes advantage of the large number of compute threads available in the SPARC T3-1 server at the application tier and achieves excellent response times. The SPARC T3-1 server consolidates the application/web tier of the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne 9.0.1 application using Oracle Solaris Containers. Containers provide flexibility, easier maintenance and better CPU utilization of the server leaving processing capacity for additional growth. A number of Oracle advanced technology and features were used to obtain this result: Oracle Solaris 10, Oracle Solaris Containers, Oracle Java Hotspot Server VM, Oracle WebLogic Server 11g Release 1, Oracle Web Tier Utilities 11g, Oracle Database 11g Release 2, the SPARC T3 and SPARC64 VII+ based servers. This is the first published result running both online and batch workload concurrently on the JD Enterprise Application server. No published results are available from IBM running the online component together with a batch workload. The 9.0.1 version of the benchmark saw some minor performance improvements relative to 9.0. When comparing between 9.0.1 and 9.0 results, the reader should take this into account when the difference between results is small. Performance Landscape JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Day in the Life Benchmark Online with Batch Workload This is the first publication on the Day in the Life benchmark run concurrently with batch jobs. The batch workload was provided by Oracle's Universal Batch Engine. System RackUnits Online Users Resp Time (sec) BatchConcur(# of UBEs) BatchRate(UBEs/m) Version SPARC T3-1, 1xSPARC T3 (1.65 GHz), Solaris 10 M3000, 1xSPARC64 VII+ (2.86 GHz), Solaris 10 4 5000 0.88 19 10 9.0.1 Resp Time (sec) — Response time of online jobs reported in seconds Batch Concur (# of UBEs) — Batch concurrency presented in the number of UBEs Batch Rate (UBEs/m) — Batch transaction rate in UBEs/minute. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Day in the Life Benchmark Online Workload Only These results are for the Day in the Life benchmark. They are run without any batch workload. System RackUnits Online Users ResponseTime (sec) Version SPARC T3-1, 1xSPARC T3 (1.65 GHz), Solaris 10 M3000, 1xSPARC64 VII (2.75 GHz), Solaris 10 4 5000 0.52 9.0.1 IBM Power 750, 1xPOWER7 (3.55 GHz), IBM i7.1 4 4000 0.61 9.0 IBM x3650M2, 2xIntel X5570 (2.93 GHz), OVM 2 1000 0.29 9.0 IBM result from http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/i/advantages/oracle/, IBM used WebSphere Configuration Summary Hardware Configuration: 1 x SPARC T3-1 server 1 x 1.65 GHz SPARC T3 128 GB memory 16 x 300 GB 10000 RPM SAS 1 x Sun Flash Accelerator F20 PCIe Card, 92 GB 1 x 10 GbE NIC 1 x SPARC Enterprise M3000 server 1 x 2.86 SPARC64 VII+ 64 GB memory 1 x 10 GbE NIC 2 x StorageTek 2540 + 2501 Software Configuration: JD Edwards EnterpriseOne 9.0.1 with Tools 8.98.3.3 Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Oracle 11g WebLogic server 11g Release 1 version 10.3.2 Oracle Web Tier Utilities 11g Oracle Solaris 10 9/10 Mercury LoadRunner 9.10 with Oracle Day in the Life kit for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne 9.0.1 Oracle’s Universal Batch Engine - Short UBEs and Long UBEs Benchmark Description JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is an integrated applications suite of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software. Oracle offers 70 JD Edwards EnterpriseOne application modules to support a diverse set of business operations. Oracle's Day in the Life (DIL) kit is a suite of scripts that exercises most common transactions of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne applications, including business processes such as payroll, sales order, purchase order, work order, and other manufacturing processes, such as ship confirmation. These are labeled by industry acronyms such as SCM, CRM, HCM, SRM and FMS. The kit's scripts execute transactions typical of a mid-sized manufacturing company. The workload consists of online transactions and the UBE workload of 15 short and 4 long UBEs. LoadRunner runs the DIL workload, collects the user’s transactions response times and reports the key metric of Combined Weighted Average Transaction Response time. The UBE processes workload runs from the JD Enterprise Application server. Oracle's UBE processes come as three flavors: Short UBEs < 1 minute engage in Business Report and Summary Analysis, Mid UBEs > 1 minute create a large report of Account, Balance, and Full Address, Long UBEs > 2 minutes simulate Payroll, Sales Order, night only jobs. The UBE workload generates large numbers of PDF files reports and log files. The UBE Queues are categorized as the QBATCHD, a single threaded queue for large UBEs, and the QPROCESS queue for short UBEs run concurrently. One of the Oracle Solaris Containers ran 4 Long UBEs, while another Container ran 15 short UBEs concurrently. The mixed size UBEs ran concurrently from the SPARC T3-1 server with the 5000 online users driven by the LoadRunner. Oracle’s UBE process performance metric is Number of Maximum Concurrent UBE processes at transaction rate, UBEs/minute. Key Points and Best Practices Two JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Application Servers and two Oracle Fusion Middleware WebLogic Servers 11g R1 coupled with two Oracle Fusion Middleware 11g Web Tier HTTP Server instances on the SPARC T3-1 server were hosted in four separate Oracle Solaris Containers to demonstrate consolidation of multiple application and web servers. See Also SPARC T3-1 oracle.com SPARC Enterprise M3000 oracle.com Oracle Solaris oracle.com JD Edwards EnterpriseOne oracle.com Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition oracle.com Disclosure Statement Copyright 2011, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Results as of 6/27/2011.

    Read the article

  • The Application Architecture Domain

    - by Michael Glas
    I have been spending a lot of time thinking about Application Architecture in the context of EA. More specifically, as an Enterprise Architect, what do I need to consider when looking at/defining/designing the Application Architecture Domain?There are several definitions of Application Architecture. TOGAF says “The objective here [in Application Architecture] is to define the major kinds of application system necessary to process the data and support the business”. FEA says the Application Architecture “Defines the applications needed to manage the data and support the business functions”.I agree with these definitions. They reflect what the Application Architecture domain does. However, they need to be decomposed to be practical.I find it useful to define a set of views into the Application Architecture domain. These views reflect what an EA needs to consider when working with/in the Applications Architecture domain. These viewpoints are, at a high level:Capability View: This view reflects how applications alignment with business capabilities. It is a super set of the following views when viewed in aggregate. By looking at the Application Architecture domain in terms of the business capabilities it supports, you get a good perspective on how those applications are directly supporting the business.Technology View: The technology view reflects the underlying technology that makes up the applications. Based on the number of rationalization activities I have seen (more specifically application rationalization), the phrase “complexity equals cost” drives the importance of the technology view, especially when attempting to reduce that complexity through standardization type activities. Some of the technology components to be considered are: Software: The application itself as well as the software the application relies on to function (web servers, application servers). Infrastructure: The underlying hardware and network components required by the application and supporting application software. Development: How the application is created and maintained. This encompasses development components that are part of the application itself (i.e. customizable functions), as well as bolt on development through web services, API’s, etc. The maintenance process itself also falls under this view. Integration: The interfaces that the application provides for integration as well as the integrations to other applications and data sources the application requires to function. Type: Reflects the kind of application (mash-up, 3 tiered, etc). (Note: functional type [CRM, HCM, etc.] are reflected under the capability view). Organization View: Organizations are comprised of people and those people use applications to do their jobs. Trying to define the application architecture domain without taking the organization that will use/fund/change it into consideration is like trying to design a car without thinking about who will drive it (i.e. you may end up building a formula 1 car for a family of 5 that is really looking for a minivan). This view reflects the people aspect of the application. It includes: Ownership: Who ‘owns’ the application? This will usually reflect primary funding and utilization but not always. Funding: Who funds both the acquisition/creation as well as the on-going maintenance (funding to create/change/operate)? Change: Who can/does request changes to the application and what process to the follow? Utilization: Who uses the application, how often do they use it, and how do they use it? Support: Which organization is responsible for the on-going support of the application? Information View: Whether or not you subscribe to the view that “information drives the enterprise”, it is a fact that information is critical. The management, creation, and organization of that information are primary functions of enterprise applications. This view reflects how the applications are tied to information (or at a higher level – how the Application Architecture domain relates to the Information Architecture domain). It includes: Access: The application is the mechanism by which end users access information. This could be through a primary application (i.e. CRM application), or through an information access type application (a BI application as an example). Creation: Applications create data in order to provide information to end-users. (I.e. an application creates an order to be used by an end-user as part of the fulfillment process). Consumption: Describes the data required by applications to function (i.e. a product id is required by a purchasing application to create an order. Application Service View: Organizations today are striving to be more agile. As an EA, I need to provide an architecture that supports this agility. One of the primary ways to achieve the required agility in the application architecture domain is through the use of ‘services’ (think SOA, web services, etc.). Whether it is through building applications from the ground up utilizing services, service enabling an existing application, or buying applications that are already ‘service enabled’, compartmentalizing application functions for re-use helps enable flexibility in the use of those applications in support of the required business agility. The applications service view consists of: Services: Here, I refer to the generic definition of a service “a set of related software functionalities that can be reused for different purposes, together with the policies that should control its usage”. Functions: The activities within an application that are not available / applicable for re-use. This view is helpful when identifying duplication functions between applications that are not service enabled. Delivery Model View: It is hard to talk about EA today without hearing the terms ‘cloud’ or shared services.  Organizations are looking at the ways their applications are delivered for several reasons, to reduce cost (both CAPEX and OPEX), to improve agility (time to market as an example), etc.  From an EA perspective, where/how an application is deployed has impacts on the overall enterprise architecture. From integration concerns to SLA requirements to security and compliance issues, the Enterprise Architect needs to factor in how applications are delivered when designing the Enterprise Architecture. This view reflects how applications are delivered to end-users. The delivery model view consists of different types of delivery mechanisms/deployment options for applications: Traditional: Reflects non-cloud type delivery options. The most prevalent consists of an application running on dedicated hardware (usually specific to an environment) for a single consumer. Private Cloud: The application runs on infrastructure provisioned for exclusive use by a single organization comprising multiple consumers. Public Cloud: The application runs on infrastructure provisioned for open use by the general public. Hybrid: The application is deployed on two or more distinct cloud infrastructures (private, community, or public) that remain unique entities, but are bound together by standardized or proprietary technology that enables data and application portability. While by no means comprehensive, I find that applying these views to the application domain gives a good understanding of what an EA needs to consider when effecting changes to the Application Architecture domain.Finally, the application architecture domain is one of several architecture domains that an EA must consider when developing an overall Enterprise Architecture. The Oracle Enterprise Architecture Framework defines four Primary domains: Business Architecture, Application Architecture, Information Architecture, and Technology Architecture. Each domain links to the others either directly or indirectly at some point. Oracle links them at a high level as follows:Business Capabilities and/or Business Processes (Business Architecture), links to the Applications that enable the capability/process (Applications Architecture – COTS, Custom), links to the Information Assets managed/maintained by the Applications (Information Architecture), links to the technology infrastructure upon which all this runs (Technology Architecture - integration, security, BI/DW, DB infrastructure, deployment model). There are however, times when the EA needs to narrow focus to a particular domain for some period of time. These views help me to do just that.

    Read the article

  • Augmenting your Social Efforts via Data as a Service (DaaS)

    - by Mike Stiles
    The following is the 3rd in a series of posts on the value of leveraging social data across your enterprise by Oracle VP Product Development Don Springer and Oracle Cloud Data and Insight Service Sr. Director Product Management Niraj Deo. In this post, we will discuss the approach and value of integrating additional “public” data via a cloud-based Data-as-as-Service platform (or DaaS) to augment your Socially Enabled Big Data Analytics and CX Management. Let’s assume you have a functional Social-CRM platform in place. You are now successfully and continuously listening and learning from your customers and key constituents in Social Media, you are identifying relevant posts and following up with direct engagement where warranted (both 1:1, 1:community, 1:all), and you are starting to integrate signals for communication into your appropriate Customer Experience (CX) Management systems as well as insights for analysis in your business intelligence application. What is the next step? Augmenting Social Data with other Public Data for More Advanced Analytics When we say advanced analytics, we are talking about understanding causality and correlation from a wide variety, volume and velocity of data to Key Performance Indicators (KPI) to achieve and optimize business value. And in some cases, to predict future performance to make appropriate course corrections and change the outcome to your advantage while you can. The data to acquire, process and analyze this is very nuanced: It can vary across structured, semi-structured, and unstructured data It can span across content, profile, and communities of profiles data It is increasingly public, curated and user generated The key is not just getting the data, but making it value-added data and using it to help discover the insights to connect to and improve your KPIs. As we spend time working with our larger customers on advanced analytics, we have seen a need arise for more business applications to have the ability to ingest and use “quality” curated, social, transactional reference data and corresponding insights. The challenge for the enterprise has been getting this data inline into an easily accessible system and providing the contextual integration of the underlying data enriched with insights to be exported into the enterprise’s business applications. The following diagram shows the requirements for this next generation data and insights service or (DaaS): Some quick points on these requirements: Public Data, which in this context is about Common Business Entities, such as - Customers, Suppliers, Partners, Competitors (all are organizations) Contacts, Consumers, Employees (all are people) Products, Brands This data can be broadly categorized incrementally as - Base Utility data (address, industry classification) Public Master Reference data (trade style, hierarchy) Social/Web data (News, Feeds, Graph) Transactional Data generated by enterprise process, workflows etc. This Data has traits of high-volume, variety, velocity etc., and the technology needed to efficiently integrate this data for your needs includes - Change management of Public Reference Data across all categories Applied Big Data to extract statics as well as real-time insights Knowledge Diagnostics and Data Mining As you consider how to deploy this solution, many of our customers will be using an online “cloud” service that provides quality data and insights uniformly to all their necessary applications. In addition, they are requesting a service that is: Agile and Easy to Use: Applications integrated with the service can obtain data on-demand, quickly and simply Cost-effective: Pre-integrated into applications so customers don’t have to Has High Data Quality: Single point access to reference data for data quality and linkages to transactional, curated and social data Supports Data Governance: Becomes more manageable and cost-effective since control of data privacy and compliance can be enforced in a centralized place Data-as-a-Service (DaaS) Just as the cloud has transformed and now offers a better path for how an enterprise manages its IT from their infrastructure, platform, and software (IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS), the next step is data (DaaS). Over the last 3 years, we have seen the market begin to offer a cloud-based data service and gain initial traction. On one side of the DaaS continuum, we see an “appliance” type of service that provides a single, reliable source of accurate business data plus social information about accounts, leads, contacts, etc. On the other side of the continuum we see more of an online market “exchange” approach where ISVs and Data Publishers can publish and sell premium datasets within the exchange, with the exchange providing a rich set of web interfaces to improve the ease of data integration. Why the difference? It depends on the provider’s philosophy on how fast the rate of commoditization of certain data types will occur. How do you decide the best approach? Our perspective, as shown in the diagram below, is that the enterprise should develop an elastic schema to support multi-domain applicability. This allows the enterprise to take the most flexible approach to harness the speed and breadth of public data to achieve value. The key tenet of the proposed approach is that an enterprise carefully federates common utility, master reference data end points, mobility considerations and content processing, so that they are pervasively available. One way you may already be familiar with this approach is in how you do Address Verification treatments for accounts, contacts etc. If you design and revise this service in such a way that it is also easily available to social analytic needs, you could extend this to launch geo-location based social use cases (marketing, sales etc.). Our fundamental belief is that value-added data achieved through enrichment with specialized algorithms, as well as applying business “know-how” to weight-factor KPIs based on innovative combinations across an ever-increasing variety, volume and velocity of data, will be where real value is achieved. Essentially, Data-as-a-Service becomes a single entry point for the ever-increasing richness and volume of public data, with enrichment and combined capabilities to extract and integrate the right data from the right sources with the right factoring at the right time for faster decision-making and action within your core business applications. As more data becomes available (and in many cases commoditized), this value-added data processing approach will provide you with ongoing competitive advantage. Let’s look at a quick example of creating a master reference relationship that could be used as an input for a variety of your already existing business applications. In phase 1, a simple master relationship is achieved between a company (e.g. General Motors) and a variety of car brands’ social insights. The reference data allows for easy sort, export and integration into a set of CRM use cases for analytics, sales and marketing CRM. In phase 2, as you create more data relationships (e.g. competitors, contacts, other brands) to have broader and deeper references (social profiles, social meta-data) for more use cases across CRM, HCM, SRM, etc. This is just the tip of the iceberg, as the amount of master reference relationships is constrained only by your imagination and the availability of quality curated data you have to work with. DaaS is just now emerging onto the marketplace as the next step in cloud transformation. For some of you, this may be the first you have heard about it. Let us know if you have questions, or perspectives. In the meantime, we will continue to share insights as we can.Photo: Erik Araujo, stock.xchng

    Read the article

  • BizTalk Server 2009 - Architecture Options

    - by StuartBrierley
    I recently needed to put forward a proposal for a BizTalk 2009 implementation and as a part of this needed to describe some of the basic architecture options available for consideration.  While I already had an idea of the type of environment that I would be looking to recommend, I felt that presenting a range of options while trying to explain some of the strengths and weaknesses of those options was a good place to start.  These outline architecture options should be equally valid for any version of BizTalk Server from 2004, through 2006 and R2, up to 2009.   The following diagram shows a crude representation of the common implementation options to consider when designing a BizTalk environment.         Each of these options provides differing levels of resilience in the case of failure or disaster, with the later options also providing more scope for performance tuning and scalability.   Some of the options presented above make use of clustering. Clustering may best be described as a technology that automatically allows one physical server to take over the tasks and responsibilities of another physical server that has failed. Given that all computer hardware and software will eventually fail, the goal of clustering is to ensure that mission-critical applications will have little or no downtime when such a failure occurs. Clustering can also be configured to provide load balancing, which should generally lead to performance gains and increased capacity and throughput.   (A) Single Servers   This option is the most basic BizTalk implementation that should be considered. It involves the deployment of a single BizTalk server in conjunction with a single SQL server. This configuration does not provide for any resilience in the case of the failure of either server. It is however the cheapest and easiest to implement option of those available.   Using a single BizTalk server does not provide for the level of performance tuning that is otherwise available when using more than one BizTalk server in a cluster.   The common edition of BizTalk used in single server implementations is the standard edition. It should be noted however that if future demand requires increased capacity for a solution, this BizTalk edition is limited to scaling up the implementation and not scaling out the number of servers in use. Any need to scale out the solution would require an upgrade to the enterprise edition of BizTalk.   (B) Single BizTalk Server with Clustered SQL Servers   This option uses a single BizTalk server with a cluster of SQL servers. By utilising clustered SQL servers we can ensure that there is some resilience to the implementation in respect of the databases that BizTalk relies on to operate. The clustering of two SQL servers is possible with the standard edition but to go beyond this would require the enterprise level edition. While this option offers improved resilience over option (A) it does still present a potential single point of failure at the BizTalk server.   Using a single BizTalk server does not provide for the level of performance tuning that is otherwise available when using more than one BizTalk server in a cluster.   The common edition of BizTalk used in single server implementations is the standard edition. It should be noted however that if future demand requires increased capacity for a solution, this BizTalk edition is limited to scaling up the implementation and not scaling out the number of servers in use. You are also unable to take advantage of multiple message boxes, which would allow us to balance the SQL load in the event of any bottlenecks in this area of the implementation. Any need to scale out the solution would require an upgrade to the enterprise edition of BizTalk.   (C) Clustered BizTalk Servers with Clustered SQL Servers   This option makes use of a cluster of BizTalk servers with a cluster of SQL servers to offer high availability and resilience in the case of failure of either of the server types involved. Clustering of BizTalk is only available with the enterprise edition of the product. Clustering of two SQL servers is possible with the standard edition but to go beyond this would require the enterprise level edition.    The use of a BizTalk cluster also provides for the ability to balance load across the servers and gives more scope for performance tuning any implemented solutions. It is also possible to add more BizTalk servers to an existing cluster, giving scope for scaling out the solution as future demand requires.   This might be seen as the middle cost option, providing a good level of protection in the case of failure, a decent level of future proofing, but at a higher cost than the single BizTalk server implementations.   (D) Clustered BizTalk Servers with Clustered SQL Servers – with disaster recovery/service continuity   This option is similar to that offered by (C) and makes use of a cluster of BizTalk servers with a cluster of SQL servers to offer high availability and resilience in case of failure of either of the server types involved. Clustering of BizTalk is only available with the enterprise edition of the product. Clustering of two SQL servers is possible with the standard edition but to go beyond this would require the enterprise level edition.    As with (C) the use of a BizTalk cluster also provides for the ability to balance load across the servers and gives more scope for performance tuning the implemented solution. It is also possible to add more BizTalk servers to an existing cluster, giving scope for scaling the solution out as future demand requires.   In this scenario however, we would be including some form of disaster recovery or service continuity. An example of this would be making use of multiple sites, with the BizTalk server cluster operating across sites to offer resilience in case of the loss of one or more sites. In this scenario there are options available for the SQL implementation depending on the network implementation; making use of either one cluster per site or a single SQL cluster across the network. A multi-site SQL implementation would require some form of data replication across the sites involved.   This is obviously an expensive and complex option, but does provide an extraordinary amount of protection in the case of failure.

    Read the article

  • Gartner PCC Follow-up: Interview with Chaeny Emanavin, Usability Lead - Office of Information Develo

    - by [email protected]
    Last week at the Gartner Portals, Content and Collaboration conference in Baltimore, Chaeny and I co-presented on Oracle Enterprise 2.0 and BIA's Citizen Portal. Chaeny's presentation about the BIA solution was very well received and I wanted to do a follow-up interview with Chaeny to discuss more details about their solution and its Enterprise 2.0 features. Ajay: What were the main objectives for the BIA Citizen Portal? Chaeny: The BIA Citizen Portal is designed to provide all the services of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the community of 564 federally recognized tribes that include over 1.9 million American Indians and Alaska Natives. The BIA provides the same breadth of services that the entire U.S. Federal Government provides in one small Bureau. So, we needed a solution that was flexible enough to handle content ranging from law enforcement to housing to education. Key objectives for external users was to use the Web as a communications channel and keep them informed on what services are available. We also wanted to build an internal web presence and community for BIA's 5000 employees to ensure that they update their content, leverage internal experts and create single sources of truth for key policy documents. Ajay: How is the project being implemented? Chaeny: We are using a phased approach. In phases 1 & 2, interim internal and external sites were built to ensure usability and functional requirements are being met. In Phases 3 & 4, we built out a modern internal and external presence using Oracle WebCenter Suite and Oracle Universal Content Management (UCM), including enabling delegated content management for our internal business units. Phase 4 was completed in January 2010. Phase 5 will add deeper Enterprise 2.0 collaboration capabilities to the solution. Ajay: Are you integrating any existing sites into the new solution? Chaeny: Yes, we have a SharePoint implementation that we are using for document management. We needed more precise functionality however. We found that SharePoint would let individual administrators of a SharePoint site actually create new sites. In a 3 months span, we had over 200 new sites created and most were not being used. So, we had an enormous sprawl problem. Our requirements mandated increased governance and more granular control over the creation of sites and flexible user access to content. In SharePoint this required custom code and was very time-intensive which was unfeasible given our tight deadlines. We are piloting Oracle WebCenter Spaces as our collaboration solution to mitigate these issues. However, we must integrate our existing SharePoint investment which we can do easily by using the SharePoint connectors available in Oracle WebCenter and UCM. Ajay: What were the key design parameters for your solution? Chaeny: We wanted everything driven by standards and policies. We created a cross-functional steering group called the Indian Affairs Web Council to codify policies that were baked into the system. Other key design areas were focused on security/governance, self-service content management, ease of use, integration with legacy applications and seamless single sign-on. We are using Dublin Core as our metadata standard. We also are using Java, APEX, and ADF as our development standards. Ajay: Why was it important to standardize on a platform? Chaeny: We initially looked at best-of-breed solutions, but we faced a lot of issues getting the different solutions to work together. Going with an integrated solution was more economical, easier to learn and faster to deliver the solution. Ajay: What type of legacy applications are you integrating into the portal? Chaeny: Initially we are starting with administrative apps such as people directory and user admin and then we will integrate HR and Financial applications among others. Ajay: Can you describe some of the E20 collaboration features you are putting into the solution? Chaeny: We are adding Enterprise 2.0 using Oracle WebCenter Spaces to deliver different collaboration tools such as wikis, blogs and discussion forums. Wikis to create rapid, ad hoc monthly roll-up reports; discussion forums to provide context-specific help; blogs to capture tacit organization knowledge from experts, identify gurus and turn tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. Ajay: Are you doing anything specifically to spur adoption and usage? Chaeny: Yes, we did several things that I think helped us ramp quickly. First, we met our commitments for the new system launch date and also provided extra resources for a customer support "hotline" during the launch period. Prior to launch, we did exhaustive usability studies to capture user requirements around functionality, navigation and other key interaction areas. We also created extensive training programs so that the content managers in each business unit were comfortable using the content management tools and knew the best practices for usage. Finally, to launch the Enterprise 2.0 collaboration capabilities, we are working with a pilot group from the Division of Forestry and Wildland Fire Management of BIA. This group of people in the past have been willing early adopters and they have a strong business need to collaborate with many agencies both internal and external across State, County and other Federal jurisdictions. Their feedback is key to helping us launch Enterprise 2.0 successfully in our broader organization. Ajay: What were the biggest benefits to internal BIA employees and to the external community of users? Chaeny: For our employees, the new Enterprise 2.0-based solution will make it easier to find information; enhance employee productivity by embedding standard business processes into the system and create more of a community by creating connections with experts via social collaboration to ultimately provide better services more quickly. For the external American Indian and Alaska Native communities, we have a better relationship with the users and the new site has improved BIA's perception as a more responsive and customer-centric organization.

    Read the article

  • World Record Oracle Business Intelligence Benchmark on SPARC T4-4

    - by Brian
    Oracle's SPARC T4-4 server configured with four SPARC T4 3.0 GHz processors delivered the first and best performance of 25,000 concurrent users on Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (BI EE) 11g benchmark using Oracle Database 11g Release 2 running on Oracle Solaris 10. A SPARC T4-4 server running Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition 11g achieved 25,000 concurrent users with an average response time of 0.36 seconds with Oracle BI server cache set to ON. The benchmark data clearly shows that the underlying hardware, SPARC T4 server, and the Oracle BI EE 11g (11.1.1.6.0 64-bit) platform scales within a single system supporting 25,000 concurrent users while executing 415 transactions/sec. The benchmark demonstrated the scalability of Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition 11g 11.1.1.6.0, which was deployed in a vertical scale-out fashion on a single SPARC T4-4 server. Oracle Internet Directory configured on SPARC T4 server provided authentication for the 25,000 Oracle BI EE users with sub-second response time. A SPARC T4-4 with internal Solid State Drive (SSD) using the ZFS file system showed significant I/O performance improvement over traditional disk for the Web Catalog activity. In addition, ZFS helped get past the UFS limitation of 32767 sub-directories in a Web Catalog directory. The multi-threaded 64-bit Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition 11g and SPARC T4-4 server proved to be a successful combination by providing sub-second response times for the end user transactions, consuming only half of the available CPU resources at 25,000 concurrent users, leaving plenty of head room for increased load. The Oracle Business Intelligence on SPARC T4-4 server benchmark results demonstrate that comprehensive BI functionality built on a unified infrastructure with a unified business model yields best-in-class scalability, reliability and performance. Oracle BI EE 11g is a newer version of Business Intelligence Suite with richer and superior functionality. Results produced with Oracle BI EE 11g benchmark are not comparable to results with Oracle BI EE 10g benchmark. Oracle BI EE 11g is a more difficult benchmark to run, exercising more features of Oracle BI. Performance Landscape Results for the Oracle BI EE 11g version of the benchmark. Results are not comparable to the Oracle BI EE 10g version of the benchmark. Oracle BI EE 11g Benchmark System Number of Users Response Time (sec) 1 x SPARC T4-4 (4 x SPARC T4 3.0 GHz) 25,000 0.36 Results for the Oracle BI EE 10g version of the benchmark. Results are not comparable to the Oracle BI EE 11g version of the benchmark. Oracle BI EE 10g Benchmark System Number of Users 2 x SPARC T5440 (4 x SPARC T2+ 1.6 GHz) 50,000 1 x SPARC T5440 (4 x SPARC T2+ 1.6 GHz) 28,000 Configuration Summary Hardware Configuration: SPARC T4-4 server 4 x SPARC T4-4 processors, 3.0 GHz 128 GB memory 4 x 300 GB internal SSD Storage Configuration: "> Sun ZFS Storage 7120 16 x 146 GB disks Software Configuration: Oracle Solaris 10 8/11 Oracle Solaris Studio 12.1 Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition 11g (11.1.1.6.0) Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3.5 Oracle Internet Directory 11.1.1.6.0 Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Benchmark Description Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (Oracle BI EE) delivers a robust set of reporting, ad-hoc query and analysis, OLAP, dashboard, and scorecard functionality with a rich end-user experience that includes visualization, collaboration, and more. The Oracle BI EE benchmark test used five different business user roles - Marketing Executive, Sales Representative, Sales Manager, Sales Vice-President, and Service Manager. These roles included a maximum of 5 different pre-built dashboards. Each dashboard page had an average of 5 reports in the form of a mix of charts, tables and pivot tables, returning anywhere from 50 rows to approximately 500 rows of aggregated data. The test scenario also included drill-down into multiple levels from a table or chart within a dashboard. The benchmark test scenario uses a typical business user sequence of dashboard navigation, report viewing, and drill down. For example, a Service Manager logs into the system and navigates to his own set of dashboards using Service Manager. The BI user selects the Service Effectiveness dashboard, which shows him four distinct reports, Service Request Trend, First Time Fix Rate, Activity Problem Areas, and Cost Per Completed Service Call spanning 2002 to 2005. The user then proceeds to view the Customer Satisfaction dashboard, which also contains a set of 4 related reports, drills down on some of the reports to see the detail data. The BI user continues to view more dashboards – Customer Satisfaction and Service Request Overview, for example. After navigating through those dashboards, the user logs out of the application. The benchmark test is executed against a full production version of the Oracle Business Intelligence 11g Applications with a fully populated underlying database schema. The business processes in the test scenario closely represent a real world customer scenario. See Also SPARC T4-4 Server oracle.com OTN Oracle Business Intelligence oracle.com OTN Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition oracle.com OTN WebLogic Suite oracle.com OTN Oracle Solaris oracle.com OTN Disclosure Statement Copyright 2012, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Results as of 30 September 2012.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >