Search Results

Search found 8582 results on 344 pages for 'integration tests'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 8/344 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Sabre Manages Fast Data Growth with Oracle Data Integration Products

    - by Irem Radzik
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} Last year at OpenWorld we announced Sabre Holding as a winner of the Fusion Middleware Innovation Awards. The Sabre team did an excellent job at leveraging cutting edge technologies for managing rapid data growth and exponential scalability demands they have experienced in the travel industry. Today we announced the details and specific benefits of Sabre’s new real-time data integration solution in a press release. Please take a look if you haven’t seen it yet. Sabre Holdings Deploys Oracle Data Integrator and Oracle GoldenGate to Support Rapid Customer Growth There are 3 different areas of benefits Sabre achieved by using Oracle Data Integration products: Manages 7X increase in data sources for the enterprise data warehouse Reduced infrastructure complexity Decreased time to market for new products and services by 30 percent. This simply shows that using latest technologies helps the companies to innovate robust solutions against today’s key data management challenges. And the benefit of using a next generation data integration technology is not only seen in the IT operations, but also in the business side. A better data integration solution for the enterprise data warehouse delivered the platform they need to accelerate how they service their customers, improving their competitive advantage. Tomorrow I will give another great example of innovation with next generation data integration from Oracle. We will be discussing the Fusion Middleware Innovation Awards 2012 winners and their results with using Oracle’s data integration products.

    Read the article

  • Isolating test data in acceptance tests

    - by Matt Phillips
    I'm looking for guidance on how to keep my acceptance tests isolated. Right now the issue I'm having with being able to run the tests in parallel is the database records that are manipulated in the tests. I've written helpers that take care of doing inserts and deletes before tests are executed, to make sure the state is correct. But now I can't run them in parallel against the same database without uniquely generating the test data fields for each test. For example. Testing creating a row i'll delete everything where column A = foo and column B = bar Then I'll navigate through the UI in the test and create a record with column A = foo and column B = bar. Testing that a duplicate row is not allowed to be created. I'll insert a row with column A = foo and column B = bar and then use the UI to try and do the exact same thing. This will display an error message in the UI as expected. These tests work perfectly when ran separately and serially. But I can't run them at the same time for fear that one will create or delete a record the other is expecting. Any tips on how to structure them better so they can be run in parallel?

    Read the article

  • APress Deal of the Day 2/June/2014 - Pro SQL Server 2012 Integration Services

    - by TATWORTH
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TATWORTH/archive/2014/06/02/apress-deal-of-the-day-2june2014---pro-sql-server.aspxToday’s $10 Deal of the Day from APress at http://www.apress.com/9781430236924 is Pro SQL Server 2012 Integration Services. “Pro SQL Server 2012 Integration Services is your key to building powerful extract, transform, load (ETL) solutions using SQL Server 2012 Integration Services (SSIS).”

    Read the article

  • Quality of Code in unit tests?

    - by m3th0dman
    Is it worth to spend time when writing unit tests in order that the code written there has good quality and is very easy to read? When writing this kinds of tests I break very often the Law of Demeter, for faster writing and not using so many variables. Technically, unit tests are not reused directly - are strictly bound to the code so I do not see any reason for spending much time on them; they only need to be functionaly.

    Read the article

  • "Siebel2FusionCRM Integration" solution by ec4u (D)

    - by Richard Lefebvre
    ec4u, a CRM System Integration leader based in Germany and Switzerland, and an historical Oracle/Siebel partner, offers a complete "Siebel2FusionCRM Integration" solution, based on tools methodology and services. ec4u Siebel2FusionCRM Integration solution's main objectives are: Integration between Siebel (on-premise) and Fusion CRM / Marketing (“in the cloud”) Accounts, Contacts and Addresses are maintained by Sales in Siebel CRM and synchronized in real-time into Fusion CRM / Marketing CDM Processing ensures clean data for marketing campaigns (validation and deduplication) Create E-Mail marketing campaigns and newsletters in Fusion The solution features: Upsert processes figure out what information needs to be updated, inserted or terminated (deleted). However, as Siebel is the data master, it is still a one-way synchronization. Handle deleted or nullified information by terminating them in Fusion CRM (set start and end date to define the validity period) Initial load and real-time synchronization use the same processes Invocations/Operations can be repeated due to no transactional support from Fusion web services Tagging sub entries in case of 1 to N mapping (Example: Telephone number is one simple field in Siebel but in Fusion you can have multiple telephone numbers in a sub table) E-Mail-Notification in case of any error (containing error message, instance number, detailed payload) Schematron Validation Interested? Looking for more details or a partnership with ec4u for a "Siebel2FusionCRM Integration" project? Contact: Gregor Bublitz, Director Expert Services ([email protected])

    Read the article

  • Free Webinar - Using Enterprise Data Integration Dashboards

    - by andyleonard
    Join Kent Bradshaw and me as we present Using Enterprise Data Integration Dashboards Tuesday 11 Dec 2012 at 10:00 AM ET! If data is the life of the modern organization, data integration is the heart of an enterprise. Data circulation is vital. Data integration dashboards provide enterprise ETL (Extract, Transform, and Load) teams near-real-time status supported with historical performance analysis. Join Linchpins Kent Bradshaw and Andy Leonard as they demonstrate and discuss the benefits of data...(read more)

    Read the article

  • TDD: Write a separate test for object initialization or relying on other tests exercising it

    - by DXM
    This seems to be the common pattern that's emerging in some of the tests I've worked on lately. We have a class, and quite often this is legacy code whose design can't be easily altered, which has a bunch of member variables. There's some kind of "Initialize" or "Load" function which would put an object into a valid state. Only after it is initialized/loaded, are the members in the proper state so that other methods can be exercised. So when we start writing tests, first test is "TestLoad" and all we put in there is exercising initialization logic. Then we might add one (or few) TestLoadFailureXXX tests and those are definitely valuable. Then we start writing tests to verify other behaviors but all of them require the object to be loaded. So they all start by running exactly the same code as "TestLoad". So my question: Is TestLoad even necessary? Do you take it and let other tests simply exercise the loading? Or leave it so things are more explicit? I know that each unit test function should have no (or as little as possible) overlap with other test functions, but it seems like in cases of loading, this is unavoidable. And whether we like it or not, if something in the loading code breaks, we will end up with a whole test suite of failures. Is there another approach that I might be missing here? Thank you for the responses. It definitely makes sense that you want to see "InitializationTest" and if that fails you know where to start looking. In case it matters, this question is mostly about C++ and we use CppUnit framework. And now, thanks to sleske, I'll be constantly wishing that CppUnit supported test dependencies. Might have to hack something in one of these days :)

    Read the article

  • Using SQL Server Integration Services and StreamInsight Together

    The purpose of this paper is to provide guidance for enriching data integration scenarios by integrating StreamInsight with SQL Server Integration Services. Specifically, we looked at the technical challenges and solutions for such integration, by using a case study based on a customer scenarios in the telecommunications sector. NEW! SQL Monitor 2.0Monitor SQL Server Central's servers withRed Gate's new SQL Monitor.No installation required. Find out more.

    Read the article

  • Wednesday at Oracle OpenWorld 2012 - Must See Session: “Cloud and On-Premises Applications Integration, Using Oracle Integration Adapters”

    - by Lionel Dubreuil
    Don’t miss this “CON8642 - Cloud and On-Premises Applications Integration, Using Oracle Integration Adapters“ with Ramkumar Menon - Senior Product Manager, Oracle: Date: Wednesday, Oct 3 Time: 1:15 PM - 2:15 PM Location: Moscone South – 310 Oracle integration adapters in Oracle Fusion Middleware offer organizations a service-oriented approach to unlocking the information assets that have evolved in most IT environments. This session provides a detailed overview of their features and product architecture and an update on the 11g release. It also examines the changing application and technology landscape and how the integration adapters will continue to provide connectivity and harness information from diverse enterprise applications and technologies—both on-premises and in the cloud. Objectives for this session are to: Present an Oracle integration adapters overview Describe key use cases Provide an update on the 11g release and future roadmap Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}

    Read the article

  • Recommended integration mechanism for bi-directional, authenticated, encrypted connection in C clien

    - by rcampbell
    Let me first give an example. Imagine you have a single server running a JVM application. This server keeps a collection of N equations, once for each client: Client #1: 2x Client #2: 1 + y Client #3: z/4 This server includes an HTTP interface so that random visitors can type https://www.acme.com/client/3 int their browsers and see the latest evaluated result of z/4. The tricky part is that either the client or the server may change the variable value at any time, informing the other party immediately. More specifically, Client #3 - a C app - can initially tell the server that z = 20. An hour later that same client informs the server that z = 23. Likewise the server can later inform the client that z = 28. As caf pointed out in the comments, there can be a race condition when values are changed by the client and server simultaneously. The solution would be for both client and server to send the operation performed in their message, which would need to be executed by the other party. To keep things simple, let's limit the operations to (commutative) addition, allowing us to disregard message ordering. For example, the client seeds the server with z = 20: server:z=20, client:z=20 server sends {+3} message (so z=23 locally) & client sends {-2} message (so z=18 locally) at the exact same time server receives {-2} message at some point, adds to his local copy so z=21 client receives {+3} message at some point, adds to his local copy so z=21 As long as all messages are eventually evaluated by both parties, the correct answer will eventually be given to the users of the client and server since we limited ourselves to commutative operations (addition of 3 and -2). This does mean that both client and server can be returning incorrect answers in the time it takes for messages to be exchanged and processed. While undesirable, I believe this is unavoidable. Some possible implementations of this idea include: Open an encrypted, always on TCP socket connection for communication Pros: no additional infrastructure needed, client and server know immediately if there is a problem (disconnect) with the other party, fairly straightforward (except the the encryption), native support from both JVM and C platforms Cons: pretty low-level so you end up writing a lot yourself (protocol, delivery verification, retry-on-failure logic), probably have a lot of firewall headaches during client app installation Asynchronous messaging (ex: ActiveMQ) Pros: transactional, both C & Java integration, free up the client and server apps from needing retry logic or delivery verification, pretty straightforward encryption, easy extensibility via message filters/routers/etc Cons: need additional infrastructure (message server) which must never fail, Database or file system as asynchronous integration point Same pros/cons as above but messier RESTful Web Service Pros: simple, possible reuse of the server's existing REST API, SSL figures out the encryption problem for you (maybe use RSA key a la GitHub for authentication?) Cons: Client now needs to run a C HTTP REST server w/SSL, client and server need retry logic. Axis2 has both a Java and C version, but you may be limited to SOAP. What other techniques should I be evaluating? What real world experiences have you had with these mechanisms? Which do you recommend for this problem and why?

    Read the article

  • FEDEX INTEGRATION IN ASP.NET C#

    - by Dhruval Shah
    Hello, I am doing integration of fedex with out ASP.NET application. i want to get rate in specific currency only. but fedex return rate in different currency depnds on the source and target destination. how to set specific currency, so if location differed then also i can get rate in specified currency only. I have added "RateServiceDefinitions.wsdl", "RateService_v8.wsdl" services to my application but i am not getting where to set specific currency. what i need to do? Your prompt reply will be appriciated. Thanks, Dhruval Shah

    Read the article

  • Continuous integration with ClearCase and long-updating snapshot views

    - by Yulia Rogovaya
    Hi, I need to set up a continuous integration system. We use ClearCase version control and only snapshot views due to platform restrictions. I have tried setting up Hudson and Luntbuild. They both show the same behaviour. In a view, we have lots of libraries that are used for build but are strictly read-only. The CI system executes cleartool lshistory and finds a change in the VCS. After that, it executes cleartool setcs, which causes update of the view. This can take about half an hour, which is very undesirable for CI. Why wouldn't it update only the changed elements, which were previously obtained by cleartool lshistory? Is there a CI system that can do this?

    Read the article

  • How to share code with continuous integration

    - by alchemical
    I've just started working in a continuous integration environment (TeamCity). I understand the basic idea of not getting so abstracted out in your code that you are never able to build it to test functionality, etc. However, when there is deep coding going on, occasionally it will take me several days to get buildable code--but in the interim other team members may need to see my code. If I check the code in, it breaks the build. However, if I don't check it in, my team members are unable to see the most recent work. I'm wondering how this situation is best dealt with.

    Read the article

  • Social Gold API Integration Help Wanted

    - by xotyc
    Hi, Where can I find someone who is experienced in Social Gold API Integration with a private social networking website (as opposed to Facebook or others)? My network in built on the NING.com platform. Hope that's not seen as a negative thing. I need to integrate Social Gold virtual currency but have no knowledge of API coding etc. I understand this will only take less than an hour to do but I need someone who knows what they're doing and who will be 100% ethical in their work. Thanks, RB

    Read the article

  • How to write a code Newton Raphson code in R involving integration and Bessel function

    - by Ahmed
    I have want to estimate the parameters of the function which involves Bessel function and integration. However, when i tried to run it, i got a message that "Error in f(x, ...) : could not find function "BesselI" ". I don't know to fix it and would appreciate any related proposal. library(Bessel) library(maxLik) library(miscTools) K<-300 f <- function(theta,lambda,u) {exp(-u*theta)*BesselI(2*sqrt(t*u*theta*lambda),1)/u^0.5} F <- function(theta,lambda){integrate(f,0,K,theta=theta,lambda=lambda)$value} tt<-function(theta,lambda){(sqrt(lambda)*exp(-t*lambda)/(2*sqrt(t*theta)))(theta(2*t*lambda-1)*F(theta,lambda)} loglik <- function(param) { theta <- param[1] lambda <- param[2] ll <-sum(log(tt(theta,lambda))) } t<-c(24,220,340,620,550,559,689,543) res <- maxNR(loglik, start=c(0.001,0.0005),print.level=1,tol = 1e-08) summary(res)

    Read the article

  • Data Integration/EAI Project Lessons Learned

    - by Greg Harman
    Have you worked on a significant data or application integration project? I'm interested in hearing what worked for you and what didn't and how that affected the project both during and after implementation (i.e. during ongoing operation, maintenance and expansion). In addition to these lessons learned, please describe the project by including a quick overview of: The data sources and targets. Specifics are not necessary, but I'd like to know general technology categories e.g. RDBMS table, application accessed via a proprietary socket protocol, web service, reporting tool. The overall architecture of the project as related to data flows. Different human roles in the project (was this all done by one engineer? Did it include analysts with a particular expertise?) Any third-party products utilized, commercial or open source.

    Read the article

  • stub webserver for integration testing

    - by Frank Schwieterman
    I have some integration tests where I want to verify certain requires are made against a third-[arty webserver. I was thinking I would replace the third-party server with a stub server that simply logs calls made to it. The calls do not need to succeed, but I do need a record of the requests made (mainly just the path+querystring). I was considering just using IIS for this. I could 1) set up an empty site, 2) modify the system's host file to redirect requests to that site 3) parse the log file at the end of each test. This is problematic as for IIS the log files are not written to immediately, and the files are written to continuosly. I'll need to locate the file, read the contents before the test, wait a nondeterministic amount of time after the test, read the update contents, etc. Can someone think of a simpler way?

    Read the article

  • Incremental build with continuous integration server

    - by altern
    Does any of the continuous integration servers support incremental builds or filtering mechanism? For example, I want to configure some kind of filtering (as I call it) so that committing file to the specific folder will not cause full (clean) build triggering, but will cause only incremental build. By 'incremental build' I mean process that will put only committed files to the required place and all application would not need to be rebuilt from scratch. Working with images is good example of the case when we need such filtering and thus incremental builds: why do we need to rebuild whole application if only images have been changed? What we need to do is just place images to the dedicated place on server.

    Read the article

  • CruiseControl.NET Silverlight Unit Tests Interact with Desktop Windows Server 2008

    - by user292195
    Hi, Currently we have CCService running as a Domain account because the build scripts deploy to a network location. However this causes any unit tests that test the view to fail. Due to not being allowed to interact with desktop. I can change the CCService to run as local system which works however i loose network connectivity. I also have tried setting up a /interactive cmd.exe but this has been deprecated in Windows Server 2008. Any Ideas on this one? Thanks Jeremy

    Read the article

  • Automated UAT/functional tests on Swing applications without source code

    - by jas
    Our team is now working on a big Swing application. Our job basically focuses on writing extensions to the existing framework. A typical job would be adding a new panel/ or adding a new tab with some extra functionalities that suit our need. It seems FEST can help a lot in terms of unit-test our code. I am going to try it out this week. But the question here is if there is a way to do automated functional testing on the whole application. In another word, we do not only need to test our code but also the framework. After all, UAT is the most important part. I am currently considering decompiling the jar files we got into source code then we can identify the components and then use FEST. So, before I get started to give this approach a shot, I think I just ask for ideas and inspirations here. There must be people who have done similar things before. Would be nice if I could learn from the veterans who fought against this before . Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Fitnesse - multiple tests but only the last test being executed

    - by simon_bellis
    I have a Fitnesse test that I want to run twice. Once in firefox and once in ie. The test is below. The problem I am having is that only the second test is being executed by fitnesse !define COMMAND_PATTERN {%m %p} !define TEST_RUNNER {dotnet2\FitServer.exe} !****>Global Variables !define testUrl {http://localhost:1516/Web.App/Login.aspx} *****! !define browserToUse (IE) !include -c -seamless .FrontPage.LoginTests !define browserToUse (FireFox) !include -c -seamless .FrontPage.LoginTests

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >