Search Results

Search found 5295 results on 212 pages for 'transaction scope'.

Page 83/212 | < Previous Page | 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90  | Next Page >

• Precompiling LINQ Queries

  Did you know that by precompiling LINQ queries you might actually be degrading your app’s performance if you’re not careful? Julie Lerman explains how to ensure you’re not re-precompiling queries each time and losing the expected performance benefits across post-backs, short-lived service operations and other code where critical instances are going out of scope.

  Read the article

• It is Wise to Buy High PR Backlinks

  With competition extending into the virtual world, it is necessary to make sure that websites are linked to other websites of high PageRank. This is vital because, it could enjoy the airs of being on the top by mere association with another credible website. The internet domain is now extended and offers scope for websites of high quality to be on the top forever

  Read the article

• Is it possible to have multiple sets of key columns in a table?

  - by Peter Larsson

  Filtered indexes is one of my new favorite things with SQL Server 2008. I am currently working on designing a new datawarehouse. There are two restrictions doing this It has to be fed from the old legacy system with both historical data and new data It has to be fed from the new business system with new data When we incorporate the new business system, we are going to do that for one market only. It means the old legacy business system still will produce new data for other markets (together with historical data for all markets) and the new business system produce new data to that one market only. Sounds interesting this far? To accomplish this I did a thorough research about the business requirements about the business intelligence needs. Then I went on to design the sucker. How does this relate to filtered indexes you ask? I'll give one example, the Stock transaction table. Well, the key columns for the old legacy system are different from the key columns from the new business system. The old legacy system has a key of 5 columns Movement date Movement time Product code Order number Sequence number within shipment And to all thing, I found out that the Movement Time column is not really a time. It starts out like a time HH:MM:SS but seconds are added for each delivery within the shipment, so a Movement Time can look like "12:11:68". The sequence number is ordered over the distributors for shipment. As I said, it is a legacy system. The new business system has one key column, the Movement DateTime (accuracy down to 100th of nanosecond). So how to deal with this? On thing would be to have two stock transaction tables, one for legacy system and one for the new business system. But that would lead to a maintenance overhead and using partitioned views for getting data out of the warehouse. Filtered index will be of a great use here. MovementDate DATETIME2(7) MovementTime CHAR(8) NULL ProductCode VARCHAR(15) NOT NULL OrderNumber VARCHAR(30) NULL SequenceNumber INT NULL The sequence number is not even used in the new system, so I created a clustered index for a new IDENTITY column to make a new identity column which can be shared by both systems. Then I created one unique filtered index for old system like this CREATE UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED INDEX IX_Legacy (MovementDate, MovementTime, ProductCode, SequenceNumber) INCLUDE (OrderNumber, Col5, Col6, ... ) WHERE SequenceNumber IS NOT NULL And then I created a new unique filtered index for the new business system like this CREATE UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED INDEX IX_Business (MovementDate) INCLUDE (ProductCode, OrderNumber, Col12, ... ) WHERE SequenceNumber IS NULL This way I can have multiple sets of key columns on same base table which is shared by both systems.

  Read the article

• Understanding Data Science: Recent Studies

  - by Joe Lamantia

  If you need such a deeper understanding of data science than Drew Conway's popular venn diagram model, or Josh Wills' tongue in cheek characterization, "Data Scientist (n.): Person who is better at statistics than any software engineer and better at software engineering than any statistician." two relatively recent studies are worth reading.   'Analyzing the Analyzers,' an O'Reilly e-book by Harlan Harris, Sean Patrick Murphy, and Marck Vaisman, suggests four distinct types of data scientists -- effectively personas, in a design sense -- based on analysis of self-identified skills among practitioners.  The scenario format dramatizes the different personas, making what could be a dry statistical readout of survey data more engaging.  The survey-only nature of the data,  the restriction of scope to just skills, and the suggested models of skill-profiles makes this feel like the sort of exercise that data scientists undertake as an every day task; collecting data, analyzing it using a mix of statistical techniques, and sharing the model that emerges from the data mining exercise.  That's not an indictment, simply an observation about the consistent feel of the effort as a product of data scientists, about data science.  And the paper 'Enterprise Data Analysis and Visualization: An Interview Study' by researchers Sean Kandel, Andreas Paepcke, Joseph Hellerstein, and Jeffery Heer considers data science within the larger context of industrial data analysis, examining analytical workflows, skills, and the challenges common to enterprise analysis efforts, and identifying three archetypes of data scientist.  As an interview-based study, the data the researchers collected is richer, and there's correspondingly greater depth in the synthesis.  The scope of the study included a broader set of roles than data scientist (enterprise analysts) and involved questions of workflow and organizational context for analytical efforts in general.  I'd suggest this is useful as a primer on analytical work and workers in enterprise settings for those who need a baseline understanding; it also offers some genuinely interesting nuggets for those already familiar with discovery work. We've undertaken a considerable amount of research into discovery, analytical work/ers, and data science over the past three years -- part of our programmatic approach to laying a foundation for product strategy and highlighting innovation opportunities -- and both studies complement and confirm much of the direct research into data science that we conducted. There were a few important differences in our findings, which I'll share and discuss in upcoming posts.

  Read the article

• DRY and SRP

  - by Timothy Klenke

  Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TimothyK/archive/2014/06/11/dry-and-srp.aspxKent Beck’s XP Simplicity Rules (aka Four Rules of Simple Design) are a prioritized list of rules that when applied to your code generally yield a great design.  As you’ll see from the above link the list has slightly evolved over time.  I find today they are usually listed as: All Tests Pass Don’t Repeat Yourself (DRY) Express Intent Minimalistic These are prioritized.  If your code doesn’t work (rule 1) then everything else is forfeit.  Go back to rule one and get the code working before worrying about anything else. Over the years the community have debated whether the priority of rules 2 and 3 should be reversed.  Some say a little duplication in the code is OK as long as it helps express intent.  I’ve debated it myself.  This recent post got me thinking about this again, hence this post.   I don’t think it is fair to compare “Expressing Intent” against “DRY”.  This is a comparison of apples to oranges.  “Expressing Intent” is a principal of code quality.  “Repeating Yourself” is a code smell.  A code smell is merely an indicator that there might be something wrong with the code.  It takes further investigation to determine if a violation of an underlying principal of code quality has actually occurred. For example “using nouns for method names”, “using verbs for property names”, or “using Booleans for parameters” are all code smells that indicate that code probably isn’t doing a good job at expressing intent.  They are usually very good indicators.  But what principle is the code smell of Duplication pointing to and how good of an indicator is it? Duplication in the code base is bad for a couple reasons.  If you need to make a change and that needs to be made in a number of locations it is difficult to know if you have caught all of them.  This can lead to bugs if/when one of those locations is overlooked.  By refactoring the code to remove all duplication there will be left with only one place to change, thereby eliminating this problem. With most projects the code becomes the single source of truth for a project.  If a production code base is inconsistent with a five year old requirements or design document the production code that people are currently living with is usually declared as the current reality (or truth).  Requirement or design documents at this age in a project life cycle are usually of little value. Although comparing production code to external documentation is usually straight forward, duplication within the code base muddles this declaration of truth.  When code is duplicated small discrepancies will creep in between the two copies over time.  The question then becomes which copy is correct?  As different factions debate how the software should work, trust in the software and the team behind it erodes. The code smell of Duplication points to a violation of the “Single Source of Truth” principle.  Let me define that as: A stakeholder’s requirement for a software change should never cause more than one class to change. Violation of the Single Source of Truth principle will always result in duplication in the code.  However, the inverse is not always true.  Duplication in the code does not necessarily indicate that there is a violation of the Single Source of Truth principle. To illustrate this, let’s look at a retail system where the system will (1) send a transaction to a bank and (2) print a receipt for the customer.  Although these are two separate features of the system, they are closely related.  The reason for printing the receipt is usually to provide an audit trail back to the bank transaction.  Both features use the same data:  amount charged, account number, transaction date, customer name, retail store name, and etcetera.  Because both features use much of the same data, there is likely to be a lot of duplication between them.  This duplication can be removed by making both features use the same data access layer. Then start coming the divergent requirements.  The receipt stakeholder wants a change so that the account number has the last few digits masked out to protect the customer’s privacy.  That can be solve with a small IF statement whilst still eliminating all duplication in the system.  Then the bank wants to take a picture of the customer as well as capture their signature and/or PIN number for enhanced security.  Then the receipt owner wants to pull data from a completely different system to report the customer’s loyalty program point total. After a while you realize that the two stakeholders have somewhat similar, but ultimately different responsibilities.  They have their own reasons for pulling the data access layer in different directions.  Then it dawns on you, the Single Responsibility Principle: There should never be more than one reason for a class to change. In this example we have two stakeholders giving two separate reasons for the data access class to change.  It is clear violation of the Single Responsibility Principle.  That’s a problem because it can often lead the project owner pitting the two stakeholders against each other in a vein attempt to get them to work out a mutual single source of truth.  But that doesn’t exist.  There are two completely valid truths that the developers need to support.  How is this to be supported and honour the Single Responsibility Principle?  The solution is to duplicate the data access layer and let each stakeholder control their own copy. The Single Source of Truth and Single Responsibility Principles are very closely related.  SST tells you when to remove duplication; SRP tells you when to introduce it.  They may seem to be fighting each other, but really they are not.  The key is to clearly identify the different responsibilities (or sources of truth) over a system.  Sometimes there is a single person with that responsibility, other times there are many.  This can be especially difficult if the same person has dual responsibilities.  They might not even realize they are wearing multiple hats. In my opinion Single Source of Truth should be listed as the second rule of simple design with Express Intent at number three.  Investigation of the DRY code smell should yield to the proper application SST, without violating SRP.  When necessary leave duplication in the system and let the class names express the different people that are responsible for controlling them.  Knowing all the people with responsibilities over a system is the higher priority because you’ll need to know this before you can express it.  Although it may be a code smell when there is duplication in the code, it does not necessarily mean that the coder has chosen to be expressive over DRY or that the code is bad.

  Read the article

• Is there a better term than "smoothness" or "granularity" to describe this language feature?

  - by Chris

  One of the best things about programming is the abundance of different languages. There are general purpose languages like C++ and Java, as well as little languages like XSLT and AWK. When comparing languages, people often use things like speed, power, expressiveness, and portability as the important distinguishing features. There is one characteristic of languages I consider to be important that, so far, I haven't heard [or been able to come up with] a good term for: how well a language scales from writing tiny programs to writing huge programs. Some languages make it easy and painless to write programs that only require a few lines of code, e.g. task automation. But those languages often don't have enough power to solve large problems, e.g. GUI programming. Conversely, languages that are powerful enough for big problems often require far too much overhead for small problems. This characteristic is important because problems that look small at first frequently grow in scope in unexpected ways. If a programmer chooses a language appropriate only for small tasks, scope changes can require rewriting code from scratch in a new language. And if the programmer chooses a language with lots of overhead and friction to solve a problem that stays small, it will be harder for other people to use and understand than necessary. Rewriting code that works fine is the single most wasteful thing a programmer can do with their time, but using a bazooka to kill a mosquito instead of a flyswatter isn't good either. Here are some of the ways this characteristic presents itself. Can be used interactively - there is some environment where programmers can enter commands one by one Requires no more than one file - neither project files nor makefiles are required for running in batch mode Can easily split code across multiple files - files can refeence each other, or there is some support for modules Has good support for data structures - supports structures like arrays, lists, and especially classes Supports a wide variety of features - features like networking, serialization, XML, and database connectivity are supported by standard libraries Here's my take on how C#, Python, and shell scripting measure up. Python scores highest. Feature C# Python shell scripting --------------- --------- --------- --------------- Interactive poor strong strong One file poor strong strong Multiple files strong strong moderate Data structures strong strong poor Features strong strong strong Is there a term that captures this idea? If not, what term should I use? Here are some candidates. Scalability - already used to decribe language performance, so it's not a good idea to overload it in the context of language syntax Granularity - expresses the idea of being good just for big tasks versus being good for big and small tasks, but doesn't express anything about data structures Smoothness - expresses the idea of low friction, but doesn't express anything about strength of data structures or features Note: Some of these properties are more correctly described as belonging to a compiler or IDE than the language itself. Please consider these tools collectively as the language environment. My question is about how easy or difficult languages are to use, which depends on the environment as well as the language.

  Read the article

• authorize.net SIM PCI compliance

  - by David

  Does anyone know if authorize.net's SIM rids you of having to be PCI compliant? The payment form is hosted on authorize.net's site and they're processing the payment. I know you can do a relay response which basically puts some of the transaction details in a url that goes back to your website(to display a receipt). I'm not sure what all information gets put into the url though. I'm wondering if that makes you have to become PCI compliant?

  Read the article

• Log Growing Pains

  Understanding the transaction log seems to be a very difficult concept fro mos DBAs to grasp. Jason Brimhall brings us a new article that helps to troubleshoot the cause of log growths.

  Read the article

• SQL Server Table Polling by Multiple Subscribers

  - by Daniel Hester

  Background Designing Stored Procedures that are safe for multiple subscribers (to call simultaneously) can be challenging.  For example let’s say that you want multiple worker processes to poll a shared work queue that’s encapsulated as a SQL Table. This is a common scenario and through experience you’ll find that you want to use Table Hints to prevent unwanted locking when performing simultaneous queries on the same table. There are three table hints to consider: NOLOCK, READPAST and UPDLOCK. Both NOLOCK and READPAST table hints allow you to SELECT from a table without placing a LOCK on that table. However, SELECTs with the READPAST hint will ignore any records that are locked due to being updated/inserted (or otherwise “dirty”), whereas a SELECT with NOLOCK ignores all locks including dirty reads. For the initial update of the flag (that marks the record as available for subscription) I don’t use the NOLOCK Table Hint because I want to be sensitive to the “active” records in the table and I want to exclude them.  I use an Update Lock (UPDLOCK) in conjunction with a WHERE clause that uses a sub-select with a READPAST Table Hint in order to explicitly lock the records I’m updating (UPDLOCK) but not place a lock on the table when selecting the records that I’m going to update (READPAST). UPDATES should be allowed to lock the rows affected because we’re probably changing a flag on a record so that it is not included in a SELECT from another subscriber. On the UPDATE statement we should explicitly use the UPDLOCK to guard against lock escalation. A SELECT to check for the next record(s) to process can result in a shared read lock being held by more than one subscriber polling the shared work queue (SQL table). It is expected that more than one worker process (or server) might try to process the same new record(s) at the same time. When each process then tries to obtain the update lock, none of them can because another process has a shared read lock in place. Thus without the UPDLOCK hint the result would be a lock escalation deadlock; however with the UPDLOCK hint this condition is mitigated against. Note that using the READPAST table hint requires that you also set the ISOLATION LEVEL of the transaction to be READ COMMITTED (rather than the default of SERIALIZABLE). Guidance In the Stored Procedure that returns records to the multiple subscribers: Perform the UPDATE first. Change the flag that makes the record available to subscribers.  Additionally, you may want to update a LastUpdated datetime field in order to be able to check for records that “got stuck” in an intermediate state or for other auditing purposes. In the UPDATE statement use the (UPDLOCK) Table Hint on the UPDATE statement to prevent lock escalation. In the UPDATE statement also use a WHERE Clause that uses a sub-select with a (READPAST) Table Hint to select the records that you’re going to update. In the UPDATE statement use the OUTPUT clause in conjunction with a Temporary Table to isolate the record(s) that you’ve just updated and intend to return to the subscriber. This is the fastest way to update the record(s) and to get the records’ identifiers within the same operation. Finally do a set-based SELECT on the main Table (using the Temporary Table to identify the records in the set) with either a READPAST or NOLOCK table hint.  Use NOLOCK if there are other processes (besides the multiple subscribers) that might be changing the data that you want to return to the multiple subscribers; or use READPAST if you're sure there are no other processes (besides the multiple subscribers) that might be updating column data in the table for other purposes (e.g. changes to a person’s last name).  NOLOCK is generally the better fit in this part of the scenario. See the following as an example: CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[usp_NewCustomersSelect] AS BEGIN -- OVERRIDE THE DEFAULT ISOLATION LEVEL SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ COMMITTED -- SET NOCOUNT ON SET NOCOUNT ON -- DECLARE TEMP TABLE -- Note that this example uses CustomerId as an identifier; -- you could just use the Identity column Id if that’s all you need. DECLARE @CustomersTempTable TABLE ( CustomerId NVARCHAR(255) ) -- PERFORM UPDATE FIRST -- [Customers] is the name of the table -- [Id] is the Identity Column on the table -- [CustomerId] is the business document key used to identify the -- record globally, i.e. in other systems or across SQL tables -- [Status] is INT or BIT field (if the status is a binary state) -- [LastUpdated] is a datetime field used to record the time of the -- last update UPDATE [Customers] WITH (UPDLOCK) SET [Status] = 1, [LastUpdated] = GETDATE() OUTPUT [INSERTED].[CustomerId] INTO @CustomersTempTable WHERE ([Id] = (SELECT TOP 100 [Id] FROM [Customers] WITH (READPAST) WHERE ([Status] = 0) ORDER BY [Id] ASC)) -- PERFORM SELECT FROM ENTITY TABLE SELECT [C].[CustomerId], [C].[FirstName], [C].[LastName], [C].[Address1], [C].[Address2], [C].[City], [C].[State], [C].[Zip], [C].[ShippingMethod], [C].[Id] FROM [Customers] AS [C] WITH (NOLOCK), @CustomersTempTable AS [TEMP] WHERE ([C].[CustomerId] = [TEMP].[CustomerId]) END In a system that has been designed to have multiple status values for records that need to be processed in the Work Queue it is necessary to have a “Watch Dog” process by which “stale” records in intermediate states (such as “In Progress”) are detected, i.e. a [Status] of 0 = New or Unprocessed; a [Status] of 1 = In Progress; a [Status] of 2 = Processed; etc.. Thus, if you have a business rule that states that the application should only process new records if all of the old records have been processed successfully (or marked as an error), then it will be necessary to build a monitoring process to detect stalled or stale records in the Work Queue, hence the use of the LastUpdated column in the example above. The Status field along with the LastUpdated field can be used as the criteria to detect stalled / stale records. It is possible to put this watchdog logic into the stored procedure above, but I would recommend making it a separate monitoring function. In writing the stored procedure that checks for stale records I would recommend using the same kind of lock semantics as suggested above. The example below looks for records that have been in the “In Progress” state ([Status] = 1) for greater than 60 seconds: CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[usp_NewCustomersWatchDog] AS BEGIN -- TO OVERRIDE THE DEFAULT ISOLATION LEVEL SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ COMMITTED -- SET NOCOUNT ON SET NOCOUNT ON DECLARE @MaxWait int; SET @MaxWait = 60 IF EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM [dbo].[Customers] WITH (READPAST) WHERE ([Status] = 1) AND (DATEDIFF(s, [LastUpdated], GETDATE()) > @MaxWait)) BEGIN SELECT 1 AS [IsWatchDogError] END ELSE BEGIN SELECT 0 AS [IsWatchDogError] END END Downloads The zip file below contains two SQL scripts: one to create a sample database with the above stored procedures and one to populate the sample database with 10,000 sample records.  I am very grateful to Red-Gate software for their excellent SQL Data Generator tool which enabled me to create these sample records in no time at all. References http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187373.aspx http://www.techrepublic.com/article/using-nolock-and-readpast-table-hints-in-sql-server/6185492 http://geekswithblogs.net/gwiele/archive/2004/11/25/15974.aspx http://grounding.co.za/blogs/romiko/archive/2009/03/09/biztalk-sql-receive-location-deadlocks-dirty-reads-and-isolation-levels.aspx

  Read the article

• 5 Steps for Creating a Successful Banner Design

  Banners are supposed to be one of the most effective ways of marketing your products and services. They account for a better visibility and scope for placing your products in the eyes of your custome... [Author: Jessica Woodson - Web Design and Development - March 29, 2010]

  Read the article

• Idera Compliance Manager 3.5 and SQL Server 2012 Release Candidate

  Unlike most conventional database auditing solutions, SQL Compliance Manager places a blanket over data access with real-time auditing. Clients can pinpoint any malicious intent with sensitive column auditing. This feature gives specifics as to who has accessed information located within an audited table's sensitive columns. With transaction status auditing, database administrators can detect suspicious activity by auditing the status of transactions that execute DML statements on an audited database with the help of rollbacks and save-points. In addition, SQL Compliance Manager lives up t...

  Read the article

• Uploaded Four New ADF Examples

  - by Steve Muench

  I've uploaded four new examples for your learning pleasure:  162. Set Binding to Attr Value from Selected SelectBooleanRadio Button in Data-Driven Button Group 163. Binding SelectBooleanRadio to True/False Value in DB Row 164. Method Action Invoking Managed Bean Method Without Making Bean a DataControl 165. Using a Headless Taskflow to Perform Work in an Autononmous Transaction Enjoy.

  Read the article

• Is there an official Ubuntu free support team?

  - by João Pinto

  I have found that there is an "Ubuntu Support Team" at https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-helpteam but I am not sure it's official or active. Please note that I am not referring to bug fixing support, I am referring to the broader OS support, with people available to engage users needing support with a problem and drive it to a proper resolution. Is there an official team for this purpose with a clear scope and activity plan ?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu systematically losing wired connection

  - by Lukasz Baczynski

  I'm working on 11.10 for few recent days, everything was working perfect until today. Updated ubuntu (some certs were updates as far as i remember) and from this time, wired network stops working randomly and systematically. (All other pcs/macs work fine) From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=25 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=26 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=27 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=28 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=29 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=30 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.9 icmp_seq=31 Destination Host Unreachable 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=32 ttl=64 time=1003 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=33 ttl=64 time=0.496 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=34 ttl=64 time=0.576 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=35 ttl=64 time=0.522 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=36 ttl=64 time=0.624 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=37 ttl=64 time=0.625 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=38 ttl=64 time=0.555 ms It'll work for 20 seconds then it'll stop working for 10-30sec and so on. I've tried setting my router to give static IPs, it doesn't help. NOTHING has been changed since yesterday beside the package update... Here are other settings that may be useful: baka@baka-PC:~/Private/projects/wduk$ lspci -nnk | grep -iA2 net 06:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller [10ec:8168] (rev 06) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. P8P67 and other motherboards [1043:8432] Kernel driver in use: r8169 baka@baka-PC:~/Private/projects/wduk$ ifconfig -a eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr **Removed MAC address** inet addr:192.168.0.9 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::ca60:ff:fe0a:85b2/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:6400 errors:0 dropped:6400 overruns:0 frame:6400 TX packets:7085 errors:0 dropped:107 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:4191983 (4.1 MB) TX bytes:886881 (886.8 KB) Interrupt:72 Base address:0x2000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:2522 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2522 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:1070130 (1.0 MB) TX bytes:1070130 (1.0 MB) baka@baka-PC:~/Private/projects/wduk$ cat /etc/resolv.conf # Generated by NetworkManager nameserver 8.8.8.8 thanks for help

  Read the article

• Wireless Broadcom 4313 not working on Ubuntu 12.04

  - by user88568

  It seems a lot of people are having this problem, but none of the posted solutions have worked for me so far. My driver is installed and activated, I have tried removing and re-adding the network, and various other fixes. No networks were picked up on my first boot, the next day wireless worked fine, and since then it does not detect networks, and when I manually try to connect, it repeatedly asks for the password and does not connect. Here's my info: 03:00.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation BCM4313 802.11b/g/n Wireless LAN Controller (rev 01) Subsystem: Dell Inspiron M5010 / XPS 8300 Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 17 Memory at f0500000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K] Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3 Capabilities: [58] Vendor Specific Information: Len=78 Capabilities: [48] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ Capabilities: [d0] Express Endpoint, MSI 00 Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting Capabilities: [13c] Virtual Channel Capabilities: [160] Device Serial Number 00-00-a1-ff-ff-f3-70-f1 Capabilities: [16c] Power Budgeting Kernel driver in use: wl Kernel modules: wl, bcma, brcmsmac root@michelle-laptop:/home/michelle# ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 70:f1:a1:f3:ba:ab inet6 addr: fe80::72f1:a1ff:fef3:baab/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:29 TX packets:0 errors:30 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:17 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr f0:4d:a2:53:83:7a UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:43 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:104 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:104 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:8000 (8.0 KB) TX bytes:8000 (8.0 KB) root@michelle-laptop:/home/michelle# lsmod Module Size Used by dm_crypt 22528 0 snd_hda_codec_hdmi 31775 1 snd_hda_codec_realtek 174313 1 snd_hda_intel 32765 5 snd_hda_codec 109562 3 snd_hda_codec_hdmi,snd_hda_codec_realtek,snd_hda_intel snd_hwdep 13276 1 snd_hda_codec snd_pcm 80845 4 snd_hda_codec_hdmi,snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec snd_seq_midi 13132 0 snd_rawmidi 25424 1 snd_seq_midi snd_seq_midi_event 14475 1 snd_seq_midi snd_seq 51567 2 snd_seq_midi,snd_seq_midi_event parport_pc 32114 0 ppdev 12849 0 binfmt_misc 17292 1 lib80211_crypt_tkip 17275 0 bnep 17830 2 rfcomm 38139 0 snd_timer 28931 2 snd_pcm,snd_seq snd_seq_device 14172 3 snd_seq_midi,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq joydev 17393 0 wl 2646601 0 snd 62064 19 snd_hda_codec_hdmi,snd_hda_codec_realtek,snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_hwdep,snd_pcm,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq,snd_timer,snd_seq_device soundcore 14635 1 snd btusb 17912 0 bluetooth 158438 11 bnep,rfcomm,btusb uvcvideo 67203 0 videodev 86588 1 uvcvideo snd_page_alloc 14108 2 snd_hda_intel,snd_pcm lib80211 14040 2 lib80211_crypt_tkip,wl intel_ips 17822 0 psmouse 72919 0 serio_raw 13027 0 mei 36570 0 dell_laptop 17767 0 dell_wmi 12601 0 dcdbas 14098 1 dell_laptop sparse_keymap 13658 1 dell_wmi mac_hid 13077 0 lp 17455 0 parport 40930 3 parport_pc,ppdev,lp usbhid 41906 0 hid 77367 1 usbhid wmi 18744 1 dell_wmi i915 414817 3 atl1c 36718 0 drm_kms_helper 45466 1 i915 drm 197692 4 i915,drm_kms_helper i2c_algo_bit 13199 1 i915 video 19068 1 i915 root@michelle-laptop:/home/michelle# iwlist scan lo Interface doesn't support scanning. eth1 Interface doesn't support scanning. eth0 No scan results root@michelle-laptop:/home/michelle# rfkill list 0: dell-wifi: Wireless LAN Soft blocked: no Hard blocked: no 1: dell-bluetooth: Bluetooth Soft blocked: yes Hard blocked: no 3: brcmwl-0: Wireless LAN Soft blocked: no Hard blocked: no Obviously I don't know what I'm doing. I'd appreciate any help! Thanks!

  Read the article

• Move Data into the grid for scalable, predictable response times

  - by JuergenKress

  CloudTran is pleased to introduce the availability of the CloudTran Transaction and Persistence Manager for creating scalable, reliable data services on the Oracle Coherence In-Memory Data Grid (IMDG). Use of IMDG architectures has been key to handling today’s web-scale loads because it eliminates database latency by storing important and frequently access data in memory instead of on disk. The CloudTran product lets developers easily use an IMDG for full ACID-compliant transactions without having to be concerned about the location or spread of data. The system has its own implementation of fast, scalable distributed transactions that does NOT depend on XA protocols but still guarantees all ACID properties. Plus, CloudTran asynchronously replicates data going into the IMDG to back-end datastores and back-up data centers, again ensuring ACID properties. CloudTran can be accessed through Java Persistence API (JPA via TopLink Grid) and now, through a new Low-Level API, or LLAPI. This is ideal for use in SOA applications that need data reliability, high availability, performance, and scalability. It is still in its limited beta release, the LLAPI gives developers the ability to use standard put/remove logic available in Coherence and then wrap logic with simple Spring annotations or XML+AspectJ to start transactions. An important feature of LLAPI is the ability to join transactions. This is a common outcome for SOA applications that need to reduce network traffic by aggregating data into single cache entries and then doing SOA service processing in the node holding the data. This results in the need to orchestrate transaction processing across multiple service calls. CloudTran has the capability to handle these “multi-client” transactions at speed with no loss in ACID properties. Developing software around an IMDG like Oracle Coherence is an important choice for today’s web-scale applications and services. But this introduces new architectural considerations to maintain scalability in light of increased network loads and data movement. Without using CloudTran, developers are faced with an incredibly difficult task to ensure data reliability, availability, performance, and scalability when working with an IMDG. Working with highly distributed data that is entirely volatile while stored in memory presents numerous edge cases where failures can result in data loss. The CloudTran product takes care of all of this, leaving developers with the confidence and peace of mind that all data is processed correctly. For those interested in evaluating the CloudTran product and IMDGs, take a look at this link for more information: http://www.CloudTran.com/downloadAPI.ph , or send your questions to [email protected]. SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit  www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum Technorati Tags: CloudTran,data grid,M,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

  Read the article

• Temporary table vs Temporary variable in SQL Server

  We have seen lot of difference between temporary variable and temporary table. Here is a nice difference in Transaction perspective.

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Server Cannot Route to the Internet

  - by ejes

  I've been having this problem for weeks now, and I can't seem to figure out the problem. My server can route the local network and serves it well, however it cannot access the internet. It can't be the router because everything else on this lan can route through the router. I've even switched the ethernet port. Any help would be appreciated. I've tried all the usual places, anyway, here are the configs: root@uhs:~# uname -a Linux uhs 3.0.0-16-generic-pae #28-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 27 19:24:01 UTC 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux root@uhs:~# cat /etc/network/interfaces # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5). # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface # auto eth1 # iface eth1 inet dhcp auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255 gateway 192.168.0.1 root@uhs:~# ping -c 4 192.168.0.1 PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.334 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.339 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.324 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.339 ms --- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 2997ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.324/0.334/0.339/0.006 ms root@uhs:~# ping -c 4 209.85.145.103 PING 209.85.145.103 (209.85.145.103) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 209.85.145.103 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 3023ms root@uhs:~# ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:0c:6e:a0:92:6e inet addr:192.168.0.3 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::20c:6eff:fea0:926e/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:13131114 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:10540297 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:5 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:3077922794 (3.0 GB) TX bytes:3827489734 (3.8 GB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0xa000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:7721 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:7721 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:551950 (551.9 KB) TX bytes:551950 (551.9 KB) root@uhs:~# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 root@uhs:~# # PRETEND Traceroute root@uhs:~# for i in {1..30}; do ping -t $i -c 1 209.85.145.103; done | grep "Time to live exceeded" root@uhs:~#

  Read the article

• How In-Memory Database Objects Affect Database Design: The Conceptual Model

  - by drsql

  After a rather long break in the action to get through some heavy tech editing work (paid work before blogging, I always say!) it is time to start working on this presentation about In-Memory Databases. I have been trying to decide on the scope of the demo code in the back of my head, and I have added more and taken away bits and pieces over time trying to find the balance of "enough" complexity to show data integrity issues and joins, but not so much that we get lost in the process of trying to...(read more)

  Read the article

• Walmart's Mobile Self-Checkout

  - by David Dorf

  Reuters recently reported that Walmart was testing an iPhone-based self-checkout at a store near its headquarters.  Consumers scan items as they're placed in the physical basket, then the virtual basket is transferred to an existing self-checkout station where payment is tendered.  A very solid solution, but not exactly original. Before we go further, let's look at the possible cost savings for Walmart.  According to the article: Pushing more shoppers to scan their own items and make payments without the help of a cashier could save Wal-Mart millions of dollars, Chief Financial Officer Charles Holley said on March 7. The company spends about $12 million in cashier wages every second at its Walmart U.S. stores. Um, yeah. Using back-of-the-napkin math, I calculated Walmart's cashiers are making $157k per hour.  A more accurate statement would be saving $12M per year for each second saved on the average transaction time.  So if this self-checkout approach saves 2 seconds per transaction on average, Walmart would save $24M per year on labor.  Maybe.  Sometimes that savings will be used to do other tasks in the store, so it may not directly translate to less employees. When I saw this approach demonstrated in Sweden, there were a few differences, which may or may not be in Walmart's plans.  First, the consumers were identified based on their loyalty card.  In order to offset the inevitable shrink, retailers need to save on labor but also increase basket size, typically via in-aisle promotions.  As they scan items, retailers should target promos, and that's easier to do if you know some shopping history.  Last I checked, Walmart had no loyalty program. Second, at the self-checkout station consumers were randomly selected for an audit in which they must re-scan all the items just like you do at a typical self-checkout.  If you were found to be stealing, your ability to use the system can be revoked.  That's a tough one in the US, especially when the system goes wrong, either by mistake or by lying.  At least in my view, the Swedes are bit more trustworthy than the people of Walmart. So while I think the idea of mobile self-checkout has merit, perhaps its not right for Walmart.

  Read the article

• WiFi connected to router, but no internet connection

  - by Quetzacotl

  I just got a new notebook, a ThinkPad Edge E530, and installed Ubuntu on it. I'm pretty new to Ubuntu. On the same laptop, running Windows 7, the Wi-Fi connection works fine. Ethernet connection works both on Win7 and on Ubuntu. Only Wi-Fi on Ubuntu does not work; it connects to the Wi-Fi access point but I don't have Internet access. My wireless card is Intel Centrino Wireless-N 2230. What can fix the problem? EDIT: ifconfig -a eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr b8:88:e3:30:72:34 UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:43 Base address:0x8000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:163 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:163 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:10124 (10.1 KB) TX bytes:10124 (10.1 KB) usb0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 02:15:e0:ec:01:00 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 68:5d:43:43:71:e1 inet addr:192.168.2.101 Bcast:192.168.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::6a5d:43ff:fe43:71e1/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:40 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:220 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:2801 (2.8 KB) TX bytes:26230 (26.2 KB) route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 wlan0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1000 0 0 wlan0 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 2 0 0 wlan0 cat /etc/resolv.conf # Dynamic resolv.conf(5) file for glibc resolver(3) generated by resolvconf(8) # DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE BY HAND -- YOUR CHANGES WILL BE OVERWRITTEN nameserver 127.0.0.1 iwconfig lo no wireless extensions. usb0 no wireless extensions. wlan0 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"SATELITE" Mode:Managed Frequency:2.462 GHz Access Point: 00:1F:1F:8D:CC:08 Bit Rate=1 Mb/s Tx-Power=16 dBm Retry long limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off Power Management:off Link Quality=60/70 Signal level=-50 dBm Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0 Tx excessive retries:93 Invalid misc:243 Missed beacon:0 eth0 no wireless extensions.

  Read the article

• Bridging 10GbE with 12.04 - bridging works but the bridging computer has no internet access

  - by Donal

  I have been trying to get 12.04 bridging working with two 10GbE cards. I have 2 10GbE cards in a linux box being used only for this bridge, 1 with 2 10GbaseT ports and another with a single CX4 port. I have 2 client computers connected with 10GbaseT cards and the CX4 card connects to a procurve switch. I can get the bridging happening mostly the way that I want, The clients receive dhcp information from the dhcp server (not the bridging machine) and can connect to and properly see the rest of the network. Speeds are ok, not amazing but working on that is another matter. My problem is that the bridging machine has no internet access ... meaning I can't update anything or apt-get anything It can ping all other machines on the local network. I've tried the helpful hints from: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/NetworkConnectionBridge "Enabling Internet Use on the Bridging Computer" and get the following RTNETLINK answers: File exists but dhclient br0 does nothing for me :( I think if it is anything it a multiple route problem as both br0 and eth4 have ipaddresses ... even though I have only set it up so that br0 has one ... Bridge setup details: /etc/network/interface auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.0.246 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 dns-nameservers 192.168.0.1 dns-search example.com dns-domain example.com #(eth2 & eth3 are the 10GbaseT) #(eth4 is the CX4 connection) pre-up ip link set eth2 down pre-up ip link set eth3 down pre-up ip link set eth4 down pre-up brctl addbr br0 pre-up brctl addif br0 eth4 eth3 eth2 pre-up ip addr flush dev eth3 pre-up ip addr flush dev eth2 pre-up ip addr flush dev eth4 post-down ip link set eth4 down post-down ip link set eth2 down post-down ip link set eth3 down post-down ip link set br0 down post-down brctl delif br0 eth2 eth3 eth4 post-down brctl delbr br0 ifconfig -a br0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:15:17:22:20:34 inet addr:192.168.0.102 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::215:17ff:fe22:2034/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:4957 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1077 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:596320 (596.3 KB) TX bytes:139952 (139.9 KB) eth4 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:60:dd:47:7c:05 inet addr:192.168.0.57 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::260:ddff:fe47:7c05/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:9000 Metric:1 RX packets:15391 errors:0 dropped:51 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1207 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:5916769 (5.9 MB) TX bytes:154312 (154.3 KB) Interrupt:70 route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth4 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 br0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1000 0 0 br0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth4

  Read the article

• Programming Language, Turing Completeness and Turing Machine

  - by Amumu

  A programming language is said to be Turing Completeness if it can successfully simulate a universal TM. Let's take functional programming language for example. In functional programming, function has highest priority over anything. You can pass functions around like any primitives or objects. This is called first class function. In functional programming, your function does not produce side effect i.e. output strings onto screen, change the state of variables outside of its scope. Each function has a copy of its own objects if the objects are passed from the outside, and the copied objects are returned once the function finishes its job. Each function written purely in functional style is completely independent to anything outside of it. Thus, the complexity of the overall system is reduced. This is referred as referential transparency. In functional programming, each function can have its local variables kept its values even after the function exits. This is done by the garbage collector. The value can be reused the next time the function is called again. This is called memoization. A function usually should solve only one thing. It should model only one algorithm to answer a problem. Do you think that a function in a functional language with above properties simulate a Turing Machines? Functions (= algorithms = Turing Machines) are able to be passed around as input and returned as output. TM also accepts and simulate other TMs Memoization models the set of states of a Turing Machine. The memorized variables can be used to determine states of a TM (i.e. which lines to execute, what behavior should it take in a give state ...). Also, you can use memoization to simulate your internal tape storage. In language like C/C++, when a function exits, you lose all of its internal data (unless you store it elsewhere outside of its scope). The set of symbols are the set of all strings in a programming language, which is the higher level and human-readable version of machine code (opcode) Start state is the beginning of the function. However, with memoization, start state can be determined by memoization or if you want, switch/if-else statement in imperative programming language. But then, you can't Final accepting state when the function returns a value, or rejects if an exception happens. Thus, the function (= algorithm = TM) is decidable. Otherwise, it's undecidable. I'm not sure about this. What do you think? Is my thinking true on all of this? The reason I bring function in functional programming because I think it's closer to the idea of TM. What experience with other programming languages do you have which make you feel the idea of TM and the ideas of Computer Science in general? Can you specify how you think?

  Read the article

• WebCenter Customer Spotlight: Indecopi

  - by me

  Author: Peter Reiser - Social Business Evangelist, Oracle WebCenter  Solution SummaryIndecopi Optimizes Patent Approval Management and Accelerates Customer Service Times by 40% Indecopi is a decentralized public agency that promotes the country’s markets and protects consumer rights. It promotes fair and honest competition and safeguards all forms of intellectual property through three directorates: Author’s Rights, Inventions and New Technologies, and Trademarks. The business challenge was to unify the agency’s technology infrastructure to create a business process management strategy, consolidate the organization’s Web platform and improve and automate information services for citizens and businesses, and streamline patent procedures by digitizing documentation. Indecopi optimized patent information services , organized information, provided around-the-clock online access to users, and developed a Web site that provides internal and external users access to DIN information, such as patent documentation, through a user-friendly interface. Indecopi achieved impressive business result by reducing use of paper files by 50%, accelerating transaction approvals,  reduce nonvalue-added activities by 85% and  accelerated customer service times by 40%. Company OverviewPeru’s Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual (Indecopi), the National Institute for the Defense of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property, is a decentralized public agency that promotes the country’s markets and protects consumer rights. It promotes fair and honest competition and safeguards all forms of intellectual property through three directorates: Author’s Rights, Inventions and New Technologies, and Trademarks. Business ChallengesIndecopi's challenge was to unify the agency’s technology infrastructure to create a business process management strategy, starting with the Directorate of Inventions and New Technologies (DIN), consolidate the organization’s Web platform to meet new demands for software and process development, such as for patent applications, and improve and automate information services for citizens and businesses and streamline patent procedures by digitizing documentation. Solution DeployedIndecopi optimized patent information services with Oracle Business Process Management, automating processes to deliver expedient searches, and to create new services, such as alerts to users. They organized information and provided around-the-clock online access to users with Oracle WebCenter Content. In addition they used Oracle WebLogic Server to develop a Web site that provides internal and external users access to DIN information, such as patent documentation, through a user-friendly interface. Business Results Indecopi achieved impressive business results Reduced use of paper files by 50% Accelerated transaction approvals  reduce nonvalue-added activities, such as manual document copying to obtain patents, by 85% Accelerated customer service times by 40% by optimizing procedures, such as searches and online information related to granting patents “Oracle Business Process Manager has been a paradigm shift in process management. By digitalizing and automating our patents information services, we can now manage everything in the simplest way possible, expanding our options for the creation of new services.” Sergio Rodríguez, Assistant Director, Inventions and New Technologies Directorate, Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y la Propiedad Intelectual Additional Information Indecopi Customer Snapshot Oracle WebCenter Content

  Read the article

• Revenue Recognition: Performance Obligation Pass a Hurdle

  - by Theresa Hickman

  I met up with Seamus Moran, our resident accounting expert, to get his thoughts about the latest happenings with IFRS. Last week, on March 13,  the comment period on the FASB and IASB exposure draft “Revenue From Contracts with Customers” closed.  FASB and IASB have just over 20 comment letters – a very small number.  The implication is that that the exposure draft does reflect general acceptance, and therefore will be published as both a US and Internationally Generally Accepted Accounting Standard. At a recent conference call, FASB and IASB expected to complete their report to both Boards on the comments by early summer, complete their deliberation of the comments by the fall and draft the final standard text by late this year. It is assumed the concept of Performance Obligations would become US GAAP and IFRS in place of the existing standards.  They confirmed that all existing US GAAP and IFRS guidelines would be withdrawn, and that they were in dialogue with the SEC on withdrawing the SEC guidelines on the revenue issue as well.The open question is when will Performance Obligations become effective?  The Boards have said that they would like this Revenue Recognition standard and the the Lease Accounting standard to be effective at the same time because what isn’t either insurance, interest, or a lease is a revenue arrangement.  However, ascertaining what is generally acceptable in respect of Leases is proving a little elusive, and the Boards have recently diverged a little on the P&L side of the accounting (although both are in agreement that there will be no off-balance sheet leases).  It is therefore likely that the Lease standard might be delayed. One wonders if the Boards will  define effectivity of the Revenue standard independently of the Lease standard or if they will stick with their resolve to make them co-effective.  The Boards have also said that neither standard will be effective before June 2015.Here is the gist of the new Revenue Recognition principle and the steps to apply it:Recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services in an amount that reflects the consideration expected to be entitled in exchange for those goods and services.Steps to apply the core principles: Identify the contract with the customer Identify the separate performance obligations Determine the transaction price Allocate the the transaction price Recognize Revenue when a performance obligation is satisfied  

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90  | Next Page >