Search Results

Search found 9975 results on 399 pages for 'enterprise architecture'.

Page 95/399 | < Previous Page | 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102  | Next Page >

  • Should we write detailed architecture design or just an outline when designing a program?

    - by EpsilonVector
    When I'm doing design for a task, I keep fighting this nagging feeling that aside from being a general outline it's going to be more or less ignored in the end. I'll give you an example: I was writing a frontend for a device that has read/write operations. It made perfect sense in the class diagram to give it a read and a write function. Yet when it came down to actually writing them I realized they were literally the same function with just one line of code changed (read vs write function call), so to avoid code duplication I ended up implementing a do_io function with a parameter that distinguishes between operations. Goodbye original design. This is not a terribly disruptive change, but it happens often and can happen in more critical parts of the program as well, so I can't help but wondering if there's a point to design more detail than a general outline, at least when it comes to the program's architecture (obviously when you are specifying an API you have to spell everything out). This might be just the result of my inexperience in doing design, but on the other hand we have agile methodologies which sort of say "we give up on planning far ahead, everything is going to change in a few days anyway", which is often how I feel. So, how exactly should I "use" design?

    Read the article

  • Determine the folder of a SAS source file

    - by exhuma
    When I open a SAS file in enterprise guide and run it, it is executed on the server. The source file itself is located either on the production site or the development site. In both cases, it is executed the same server however. I want to be able to tell my script to store results in a relative folder. But if I write something like libname lib_out xport "..\tmp\foobar.xpt"; I get an error, because the working folder of the SAS Enterprise Guide process is not the location of my source file, but a folder on the server. And the folder ..\tmp does not exist there. Even if it would, the server process does not have write permission in that folder. I would like to determine from which folder the .sas file was loaded and set the working folder accordingly. In one case it's S:\Development\myproject\sas\foobar.sas and in the other case it's S:\Production\myproject\sas\foobar.sas It this possible at all? Or how would you do this?

    Read the article

  • Error message when running "make" command: /usr/bin/ld: i386 architecture of input file is incompatible with i386:x86-64 output

    - by user784637
    I am unable to create a working executable file by running the make command in a tree previously built on an i386 machine. I'm getting an error message in the form of me@me-desktop:~$ make /usr/bin/ld: i386 architecture of input file `../.. /Lib/libProgram.a(something.o)' is incompatible with i386:x86-64 output I've been told and reassured that this program has been tested and successfully compiled on 64-bit Fedora. I'm running a 64-bit machine me@me-desktop:~$ uname -m x86_64 I'm running Ubuntu 10.04 me@me-desktop:~$ lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS Release: 10.04 Codename: lucid I'm using g++ # me@me-desktop:~$ g++ --version g++ (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3 Copyright (C) 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. I'm also using libtool # me@me-desktop:~$ libtool --version ltmain.sh (GNU libtool) 2.2.6b Written by Gordon Matzigkeit <[email protected]>, 1996 Any clues as to what is going wrong?

    Read the article

  • Is a Mission Oriented Architecture (MOA) a better way to describe things than SOA?

    - by Brian Langbecker
    I might sound like a troll, but I would like to seriously understand this deeper. The place I work at has started to use the term MOA, versus SOA as we believe it drives more clarity and want to compare it to the true goals of SOA. A Mission Oriented Architecture is an approach whereby an application is broken down into various business mission elements, with the database, file assets, batch and real time functionality all tightly coupled in terms of delivering that piece of the functionality. The mission allows the developers to focus on a specific piece of functionality to get it right, and to build it with the ability for that piece to scale as an independent entity within the overall application. By tightly coupling the data, file assets and business logic you achieve the goals of working on a very large problem in bite size pieces. Some definitions of SOA mix it up with what is essentially a method call on a web service versus a true "service". As an architect, I have always found it fun getting everyone on the same page regarding SOA. Is it better to call it a "mission" versus a "service"?

    Read the article

  • Clouds, Clouds, Clouds Everywhere, Not a Drop of Rain!

    - by sxkumar
    At the recently concluded Oracle OpenWorld 2012, the center of discussion was clearly Cloud. Over the five action packed days, I got to meet a large number of customers and most of them had serious interest in all things cloud.  Public Cloud - particularly the Oracle Cloud - clearly got a lot of attention and interest. I think the use cases and the value proposition for public cloud is pretty straight forward. However, when it comes to private cloud, there were some interesting revelations.  Well, I shouldn’t really call them revelations since they are pretty consistent with what I have heard from customers at other conferences as well as during 1:1 interactions. While the interest in enterprise private cloud remains to be very high, only a handful of enterprises have truly embarked on a journey to create what the purists would call true private cloud - with capabilities such as self-service and chargeback/show back. For a large majority, today's reality is simply consolidation and virtualization - and they are quite far off from creating an agile, self-service and transparent IT infrastructure which is what the enterprise cloud is all about.  Even a handful of those who have actually implemented a close-to-real enterprise private cloud have taken an infrastructure centric approach and are seeing only limited business upside. Quite a few were frank enough to admit that chargeback and self-service isn’t something that they see an immediate need for.  This is in quite contrast to the picture being painted by all those surveys out there that show a large number of enterprises having already implemented an enterprise private cloud.  On the face of it, this seems quite contrary to the observations outlined above. So what exactly is the reality? Well, the reality is that there is undoubtedly a huge amount of interest among enterprises about transforming their legacy IT environment - which is often seen as too rigid, too fragmented, and ultimately too expensive - to something more agile, transparent and business-focused. At the same time however, there is a great deal of confusion among CIOs and architects about how to get there. This isn't very surprising given all the buzz and hype surrounding cloud computing. Every IT vendor claims to have the most unique solution and there isn't a single IT product out there that does not have a cloud angle to it. Add to this the chatter on the blogosphere, it will get even a sane mind spinning.  Consequently, most  enterprises are still struggling to fully understand the concept and value of enterprise private cloud.  Even among those who have chosen to move forward relatively early, quite a few have made their decisions more based on vendor influence/preferences rather than what their businesses actually need.  Clearly, there is a disconnect between the promise of the enterprise private cloud and the current adoption trends.  So what is the way forward?  I certainly do not claim to have all the answers. But here is a perspective that many cloud practitioners have found useful and thus worth sharing. To take a step back, the fundamental premise of the enterprise private cloud is IT transformation. It is the quest to create a more agile, transparent and efficient IT infrastructure that is driven more by business needs rather than constrained by operational and procedural inefficiencies. It is the new way of delivering and consuming IT services - where the IT organizations operate more like enablers of  strategic services rather than just being the gatekeepers of IT resources. In an enterprise private cloud environment, IT organizations are expected to empower the end users via self-service access/control and provide the business stakeholders a transparent view of how the resources are being used, what’s the cost of delivering a given service, how well are the customers being served, etc.  But the most important thing to note here is the enterprise private cloud is not just an IT project, rather it is a business initiative to create an IT setup that is more aligned with the needs of today's dynamic and highly competitive business environment. Surprised? You shouldn’t be. Just remember how the business users have been at the forefront of public cloud adoption within enterprises and private cloud is no exception.   Such a broad-based transformation makes cloud more than a technology initiative. It requires people (organizational) and process changes as well, and these changes are as critical as is the choice of right tools and technology. In my next blog,  I will share how essential it is for enterprise cloud technology to go hand-in hand with process re-engineering and organization changes to unlock true value of  enterprise cloud. I am sharing a short video from my session "Managing your private Cloud" at Oracle OpenWorld 2012. More videos from this session will be posted at the recently introduced Zero to Cloud resource page. Many other experts of Oracle enterprise private cloud solution will join me on this blog "Zero to Cloud"  and share best practices , deployment tips and information on how to plan, build, deploy, monitor, manage , meter and optimize the enterprise private cloud. We look forward to your feedback, suggestions and having an engaging conversion with you on this blog.

    Read the article

  • Are there good reasons not to use an ORM?

    - by hangy
    During my apprenticeship, I have used NHibernate for some smaller projects which I mostly coded and designed on my own. Now, before starting some bigger project, the discussion arose how to design data access and whether or not to use an ORM layer. As I am still in my apprenticeship and still consider myself a beginner in enterprise programming, I did not really try to push in my opinion, which is that using an object relational mapper to the database can ease development quite a lot. The other coders in the development team are much more experienced than me, so I think I will just do what they say. :-) However, I do not completely understand two of the main reasons for not using NHibernate or a similar project: One can just build one’s own data access objects with SQL queries and copy those queries out of Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio. Debugging an ORM can be hard. So, of course I could just build my data access layer with a lot of SELECTs etc, but here I miss the advantage of automatic joins, lazy-loading proxy classes and a lower maintenance effort if a table gets a new column or a column gets renamed. (Updating numerous SELECT, INSERT and UPDATE queries vs. updating the mapping config and possibly refactoring the business classes and DTOs.) Also, using NHibernate you can run into unforeseen problems if you do not know the framework very well. That could be, for example, trusting the Table.hbm.xml where you set a string’s length to be automatically validated. However, I can also imagine similar bugs in a “simple” SqlConnection query based data access layer. Finally, are those arguments mentioned above really a good reason not to utilise an ORM for a non-trivial database based enterprise application? Are there probably other arguments they/I might have missed? (I should probably add that I think this is like the first “big” .NET/C# based application which will require teamwork. Good practices, which are seen as pretty normal on Stack Overflow, such as unit testing or continuous integration, are non-existing here up to now.)

    Read the article

  • How to remove all associated files and configuration settings of an app installed through 'force architecture' command

    - by Mysterio
    A few weeks ago I installed a 32 bit .deb file through the 'force architecture' command (on my 64bit notebook), however the procedure was unsuccessful and I used the apt-get purgecommand to uninstall the app. It seems there are some leftovers of the app I uninstalled which has now broken system update. Synaptic recommended a sudo apt-get install -fwhich I did in the terminal with this initial response: Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done The following package was automatically installed and is no longer required: libntfs10 Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove them. The following packages will be REMOVED: crossplatformui 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded. 1 not fully installed or removed. After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue [Y/n]? I chose 'Y' then got this response: (Reading database ... 187616 files and directories currently installed.) Removing crossplatformui ... ztemtvcdromd: no process found dpkg: error processing crossplatformui (--remove): subprocess installed post-removal script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: crossplatformui E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) It seems the app I installed crossplatformuiis still on my system and has caused update manager to stop running with a partial upgrade warning. What do I do now?

    Read the article

  • Is the Entity Component System architecture object oriented by definition?

    - by tieTYT
    Is the Entity Component System architecture object oriented, by definition? It seems more procedural or functional to me. My opinion is that it doesn't prevent you from implementing it in an OO language, but it would not be idiomatic to do so in a staunchly OO way. It seems like ECS separates data (E & C) from behavior (S). As evidence: The idea is to have no game methods embedded in the entity. And: The component consists of a minimal set of data needed for a specific purpose Systems are single purpose functions that take a set of entities which have a specific component I think this is not object oriented because a big part of being object oriented is combining your data and behavior together. As evidence: In contrast, the object-oriented approach encourages the programmer to place data where it is not directly accessible by the rest of the program. Instead, the data is accessed by calling specially written functions, commonly called methods, which are bundled in with the data. ECS, on the other hand, seems to be all about separating your data from your behavior.

    Read the article

  • How to build an API on top of an existing Rails app with NodeJs and what architecture to use?

    - by javiayala
    The explanation I was recently hired by a company that has an old RoR 2.3 application with more than 100k users, a strong SEO strategy with more than 170k indexed urls, native android and ios applications and other custom-made mobile and web applications that rely on a not so good API from the same RoR app. They recently merged with a company from another country as an strategy to grow the business and the profit. They have almost the same stats, a similar strategy and mobile apps. We have just decided that we need to merge the data from both companies and to start a new app from scratch since the RoR app is to old and heavily patched and the app from the other company was built with a custom PHP framework without any documentation. The only good news is that both databases are in MySQL and have a similar structure. The challenge I need to build a new version that: can handle a lot of traffic, preserves the SEO strategies of both companies, serve 2 different domains, and have a strong API that can support legacy mobile apps from both companies and be ready for a new set of native apps. I want to use RoR 3.2 for the main web apps and NodeJs with a Restful API. I know that I need to be very careful with the mobile apps and handle multiple versions of the API. I also think that I need to create a service that can handle a lot IO request since the apps is heavily used to create orders for restaurants at a certain time of the day. The questions With all this in mind: What type of architecture do you recommend me to follow? What gems or node packages do you think will work the best? How do I build a new rails app and keep using the same database structure? Should I use NodeJS to build an API or just build a new service with Ruby? I know that I'm asking to much from you guys, but please help me by answering any topic that you can or by pointing me on the right direction. All your comments and feedback will be extremely appreciated! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Enterprise Service Bus (ESB): Important architectural piece to a SOA or is it just vendor hype?

    Is an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) an important architectural piece to a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), or is it just vendor hype in order to sell a particular product such as SOA-in-a-box? According to IBM.com, an ESB is a flexible connectivity infrastructure for integrating applications and services; it offers a flexible and manageable approach to service-oriented architecture implementation. With this being said, it is my personal belief that ESBs are an important architectural piece to any SOA. Additionally, generic design patterns have been created around the integration of web services in to ESB regardless of any vendor. ESB design patterns, according to Philip Hartman, can be classified in to the following categories: Interaction Patterns: Enable service interaction points to send and/or receive messages from the bus Mediation Patterns: Enable the altering of message exchanges Deployment Patterns: Support solution deployment into a federated infrastructure Examples of Interaction Patterns: One-Way Message Synchronous Interaction Asynchronous Interaction Asynchronous Interaction with Timeout Asynchronous Interaction with a Notification Timer One Request, Multiple Responses One Request, One of Two Possible Responses One Request, a Mandatory Response, and an Optional Response Partial Processing Multiple Application Interactions Benefits of the Mediation Pattern: Mediator promotes loose coupling by keeping objects from referring to each other explicitly, and it lets you vary their interaction independently Design an intermediary to decouple many peers Promote the many-to-many relationships between interacting peers to “full object status” Examples of Interaction Patterns: Global ESB: Services share a single namespace and all service providers are visible to every service requester across an entire network Directly Connected ESB: Global service registry that enables independent ESB installations to be visible Brokered ESB: Bridges services that are reluctant to expose requesters or providers to ESBs in other domains Federated ESB: Service consumers and providers connect to the master or to a dependent ESB to access services throughout the network References: Mediator Design Pattern. (2011). Retrieved 2011, from SourceMaking.com: http://sourcemaking.com/design_patterns/mediator Hartman, P. (2006, 24 1). ESB Patterns that "Click". Retrieved 2011, from The Art and Science of Being an IT Architect: http://artsciita.blogspot.com/2006/01/esb-patterns-that-click.html IBM. (2011). WebSphere DataPower XC10 Appliance Version 2.0. Retrieved 2011, from IBM.com: http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/wdpxc/v2r0/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.websphere.help.glossary.doc%2Ftopics%2Fglossary.html Oracle. (2005). 12 Interaction Patterns. Retrieved 2011, from Oracle® BPEL Process Manager Developer's Guide: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B31017_01/integrate.1013/b28981/interact.htm#BABHHEHD

    Read the article

  • Does Mono have a place in the enterprise world?

    - by Daniel
    For enterprise windows-based solutions, .NET is the best choice sometimes. How is Mono looked at by the enterprises who have to use Linux (or rather prefer to use Linux) ? Assuming that the developers aren't a problem and they are familiar with .NET/Mono and other possible competitors such as Java. Would a medium/large company run Mono on their servers as opposite to technologies such as Java? Do you know of any such company ?

    Read the article

  • Upcoming Webcast: ATG Live Webcast April 5: Managing Your Oracle E-Business Suite with Oracle Enterprise Manager

    - by Oracle_EBS
    Please consider attending the following Webcast announced today on Steven Chan's E-Business Blog linked below.  Please visit his blog to learn more and to register. Managing Your Oracle E-Business Suite with Oracle Enterprise Manager   The topics covered in this webcast will be: Manage your EBS system configurations Monitor your EBS environment's performance and uptime Keep multiple EBS environments in sync with their patches and configurations Create patches for your EBS customizations and apply them with Oracle's own patching tools Visit here to learn more and join today!

    Read the article

  • Register now to a complementary Oracle Health Sciences 3-day workshop on Enterprise Healthcare Analytics training in Dallas, US, Nov 12-14, 2013!

    - by Roxana Babiciu
    Join Oracle Health Sciences for an informative overview for Sales / Business Development and Implementation team members on Oracle Enterprise Healthcare Analytics (EHA). You’ll gain an understanding of the Oracle EHA product strategy, garner a platform overview and hear customer success stories that will enable you in the field. Be ready for technical education and training spanning three days of deep expertise sharing.

    Read the article

  • The best way to separate admin functionality from a public site?

    - by AndrewO
    I'm working on a site that's grown both in terms of user-base and functionality to the point where it's becoming evident that some of the admin tasks should be separate from the public website. I was wondering what the best way to do this would be. For example, the site has a large social component to it, and a public sales interface. But at the same time, there's back office tasks, bulk upload processing, dashboards (with long running queries), and customer relations tools in the admin section that I would like to not be effected by spikes in public traffic (or effect the public-facing response time). The site is running on a fairly standard Rails/MySQL/Linux stack, but I think this is more of an architecture problem than an implementation one: mainly, how does one keep the data and business logic in sync between these different applications? Some strategies that I'm evaluating: 1) Create a slave database of the public facing database on another machine. Extract out all of the model and library code so that it can be shared between the applications. Create new controllers and views for the admin interfaces. I have limited experience with replication and am not even sure that it's supposed to be used this way (most of the time I've seen it, it's been for scaling out the read capabilities of the same application, rather than having multiple different ones). I'm also worried about the potential for latency issues if the slave is not on the same network. 2) Create new more task/department-specific applications and use a message oriented middleware to integrate them. I read Enterprise Integration Patterns awhile back and they seemed to advocate this for distributed systems. (Alternatively, in some cases the basic Rails-style RESTful API functionality might suffice.) But, I have nightmares about data synchronization issues and the massive re-architecting that this would entail. 3) Some mixture of the two. For example, the only public information necessary for some of the back office tasks is a read-only completion time or status. Would it make sense to have that on a completely separate system and send the data to public? Meanwhile, the user/group admin functionality would be run on a separate system sharing the database? The downside is, this seems to keep many of the concerns I have with the first two, especially the re-architecting. I'm sure the answers are going to be highly dependent on a site's specific needs, but I'd love to hear success (or failure) stories.

    Read the article

  • Objective-c design advice for use of different data sources, swapping between test and live

    - by user200341
    I'm in the process of designing an application that is part of a larger piece of work, depending on other people to build an API that the app can make use of to retrieve data. While I was thinking about how to setup this project and design the architecture around it, something occurred to me, and I'm sure many people have been in similar situations. Since my work is depending on other people to complete their tasks, and a test server, this slows work down at my end. So the question is: What's the best practice for creating test repositories and classes, implementing them, and not having to depend on altering several places in the code to swap between the test classes and the actual repositories / proper api calls. Contemplate the following scenario: GetDataFromApiCommand *getDataCommand = [[GetDataFromApiCommand alloc]init]; getDataCommand.delegate = self; [getDataCommand getData]; Once the data is available via the API, "GetDataFromApiCommand" could use the actual API, but until then a set of mock data could be returned upon the call of [getDataCommand getData] There might be multiple instances of this, in various places in the code, so replacing all of them wherever they are, is a slow and painful process which inevitably leads to one or two being overlooked. In strongly typed languages we could use dependency injection and just alter one place. In objective-c a factory pattern could be implemented, but is that the best route to go for this? GetDataFromApiCommand *getDataCommand = [GetDataFromApiCommandFactory buildGetDataFromApiCommand]; getDataCommand.delegate = self; [getDataCommand getData]; What is the best practices to achieve this result? Since this would be most useful, even if you have the actual API available, to run tests, or work off-line, the ApiCommands would not necessarily have to be replaced permanently, but the option to select "Do I want to use TestApiCommand or ApiCommand". It is more interesting to have the option to switch between: All commands are test and All command use the live API, rather than selecting them one by one, however that would also be useful to do for testing one or two actual API commands, mixing them with test data. EDIT The way I have chosen to go with this is to use the factory pattern. I set up the factory as follows: @implementation ApiCommandFactory + (ApiCommand *)newApiCommand { // return [[ApiCommand alloc]init]; return [[ApiCommandMock alloc]init]; } @end And anywhere I want to use the ApiCommand class: GetDataFromApiCommand *getDataCommand = [ApiCommandFactory newApiCommand]; When the actual API call is required, the comments can be removed and the mock can be commented out. Using new in the message name implies that who ever uses the factory to get an object, is responsible for releasing it (since we want to avoid autorelease on the iPhone). If additional parameters are required, the factory needs to take these into consideration i.e: [ApiCommandFactory newSecondApiCommand:@"param1"]; This will work quite well with repositories as well.

    Read the article

  • MySQL Policy-Based Auditing Webinar Recording Now Availabile

    - by Rob Young
    For those who missed the live event, the recording of the "How to Add Policy-Based Auditing to your MySQL Applications" webinar is now available.  You can view it here. This presentation builds on my earlier blog post on MySQL Enterprise Audit that was announced at MySQL Connect in late September.  The web presentation expands on the introductory blog and covers: The regulatory problem to be solved (internal audit, PCI, Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPAA, others) MySQL Audit solutions for both Community and Enterprise users: General Log - use the basic features of the MySQL server MySQL 5.5 open audit API - or use your time and talent to build your own solution MySQL Enterprise Audit - or use the out of the box, ready for production solution from MySQL Simple, step-by-step process for installing, enabling and configuring the MySQL Enterprise Audit plugin for use with existing apps New variables and options for tuning the MySQL Enterprise Audit plugin for your specific use case Best practices for securing and managing audit log files and archived images Roadmap for adding an integrated solution around MySQL Enterprise Audit for MySQL only and Oracle/MySQL shops You can learn all the technical details on MySQL Enterprise Audit in the MySQL docs and learn all about MySQL Enterprise Edition and Auditing here. As always, thanks for your support of MySQL!

    Read the article

  • Online Media Daily: Oracle Takes Social Marketing Seriously

    - by Richard Lefebvre
    In the article published on Nov 12, 2012 and titled "Oracle Integrates Social Marketing Into Enterprise To Gain Marketing Revs," Online Media Daily explores Oracle's approach to social marketing. The publication says that Oracle is focused on showing marketers how to integrate social data into corporate business processes and how to "socialize" the corporate world. The article goes on to state:"Enterprise software companies like Oracle, SAP, IBM, Salesforce and Microsoft have been slowly building up an expertise in social marketing to integrate the data into traditional enterprise resource planning, and customer relationship management tools into social marketing tools.   Enterprise software companies like Oracle, SAP, IBM, Salesforce and Microsoft have been slowly building up an expertise in social marketing to integrate the data into traditional enterprise resource planning, and customer relationship management tools into social marketing tools.    Read more: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/187096/oracle-integrates-social-marketing-into-enterprise.html#ixzz2CPMZ1w3D Meg Bear, VP of cloud social platform at Oracle, sees the integration with ERP systems as a differentiator for the company. Oracle Social Relationship Management launched last month. It integrates social data into traditional enterprise applications like Oracle Fusion Marketing, Oracle Fusion Sales Catalog, Oracle ATG Web Commerce and Oracle ERP." The post goes on to quote a Forrester analyst stating the following:""There's room for any process-driven application to run more efficiently, especially if they're socially enabled," said Rob Koplowitz, VP and principal analyst at Forrester Research. "It takes the human part of the process not generally captured today to provide better access to content, information and collective actions." Koplowitz said several acquisitions support Oracle's long-term vision: to layer social on top of other enterprise apps, like its ERP platform." With many great acquisitions under our belt and organically grown social tools, the market recognizes that Oracle is poised to seize the moment in socially enabled business apps. Continue reading the full article here.

    Read the article

  • Online Media Daily: Oracle Takes Social Marketing Seriously

    - by Kathryn Perry
    In the article published on Nov 12, 2012 and titled "Oracle Integrates Social Marketing Into Enterprise To Gain Marketing Revs," Online Media Daily explores Oracle's approach to social marketing. The publication says that Oracle is focused on showing marketers how to integrate social data into corporate business processes and how to "socialize" the corporate world.The article goes on to state:"Enterprise software companies like Oracle, SAP, IBM, Salesforce and Microsoft have been slowly building up an expertise in social marketing to integrate the data into traditional enterprise resource planning, and customer relationship management tools into social marketing tools.   Enterprise software companies like Oracle, SAP, IBM, Salesforce and Microsoft have been slowly building up an expertise in social marketing to integrate the data into traditional enterprise resource planning, and customer relationship management tools into social marketing tools.   Read more: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/187096/oracle-integrates-social-marketing-into-enterprise.html#ixzz2CPMZ1w3DMeg Bear, VP of cloud social platform at Oracle, sees the integration with ERP systems as a differentiator for the company. Oracle Social Relationship Management launched last month. It integrates social data into traditional enterprise applications like Oracle Fusion Marketing, Oracle Fusion Sales Catalog, Oracle ATG Web Commerce and Oracle ERP."The post goes on to quote a Forrester analyst stating the following:""There's room for any process-driven application to run more efficiently, especially if they're socially enabled," said Rob Koplowitz, VP and principal analyst at Forrester Research. "It takes the human part of the process not generally captured today to provide better access to content, information and collective actions."Koplowitz said several acquisitions support Oracle's long-term vision: to layer social on top of other enterprise apps, like its ERP platform."With many great acquisitions under our belt and organically grown social tools, the market recognizes that Oracle is poised to seize the moment in socially enabled business apps.Continue reading the full article here.

    Read the article

  • Design for Vacation Tracking System

    - by Aaronaught
    I have been tasked with developing a system for tracking our company's paid time-off (vacation, sick days, etc.) At the moment we are using an Excel spreadsheet on a shared network drive, and it works pretty well, but we are concerned that we won't be able to "trust" employees forever and sometimes we run into locking issues when two people try to open the spreadsheet at once. So we are trying to build something a little more robust. I would like some input on this design in terms of maintainability, scalability, extensibility, etc. It's a pretty simple workflow we need to represent right now: I started with a basic MS Access schema like this: Employees (EmpID int, EmpName varchar(50), AllowedDays int) Vacations (VacationID int, EmpID int, BeginDate datetime, EndDate datetime) But we don't want to spend a lot of time building a schema and database like this and have to change it later, so I think I am going to go with something that will be easier to expand through configuration. Right now the vacation table has this schema: Vacations (VacationID int, PropName varchar(50), PropValue varchar(50)) And the table will be populated with data like this: VacationID | PropName | PropValue -----------+--------------+------------------ 1 | EmpID | 4 1 | EmpName | James Jones 1 | Reason | Vacation 1 | BeginDate | 2/24/2010 1 | EndDate | 2/30/2010 1 | Destination | Spectate Swamp 2 | ... | ... I think this is a pretty good, extensible design, we can easily add new properties to the vacation like the destination or maybe approval status, etc. I wasn't too sure how to go about managing the database of valid properties, I thought of putting them in a separate PropNames table but it gets complicated to manage all the different data types and people say that you shouldn't put CLR type names into a SQL database, so I decided to use XML instead, here is the schema: <VacationProperties> <PropertyNames>EmpID,EmpName,Reason,BeginDate,EndDate,Destination</PropertyNames> <PropertyTypes>System.Int32,System.String,System.String,System.DateTime,System.DateTime,System.String</PropertyTypes> <PropertiesRequired>true,true,false,true,true,false</PropertiesRequired> </VacationProperties> I might need more fields than that, I'm not completely sure. I'm parsing the XML like this (would like some feedback on the parsing code): string xml = File.ReadAllText("properties.xml"); Match m = Regex.Match(xml, "<(PropertyNames)>(.*?)</PropertyNames>"; string[] pn = m.Value.Split(','); // do the same for PropertyTypes, PropertiesRequired Then I use the following code to persist configuration changes to the database: string sql = "DROP TABLE VacationProperties"; sql = sql + " CREATE TABLE VacationProperties "; sql = sql + "(PropertyName varchar(100), PropertyType varchar(100) "; sql = sql + "IsRequired varchar(100))"; for (int i = 0; i < pn.Length; i++) { sql = sql + " INSERT VacationProperties VALUES (" + pn[i] + "," + pt[i] + "," + pv[i] + ")"; } // GlobalConnection is a singleton new SqlCommand(sql, GlobalConnection.Instance).ExecuteReader(); So far so good, but after a few days of this I then realized that a lot of this was just a more specific kind of a generic workflow which could be further abstracted, and instead of writing all of this boilerplate plumbing code I could just come up with a workflow and plug it into a workflow engine like Windows Workflow Foundation and have the users configure it: In order to support routing these configurations throw the workflow system, it seemed natural to implement generic XML Web Services for this instead of just using an XML file as above. I've used this code to implement the Web Services: public class VacationConfigurationService : WebService { [WebMethod] public void UpdateConfiguration(string xml) { // Above code goes here } } Which was pretty easy, although I'm still working on a way to validate that XML against some kind of schema as there's no error-checking yet. I also created a few different services for other operations like VacationSubmissionService, VacationReportService, VacationDataService, VacationAuthenticationService, etc. The whole Service Oriented Architecture looks like this: And because the workflow itself might change, I have been working on a way to integrate the WF workflow system with MS Visio, which everybody at the office already knows how to use so they could make changes pretty easily. We have a diagram that looks like the following (it's kind of hard to read but the main items are Activities, Authenticators, Validators, Transformers, Processors, and Data Connections, they're all analogous to the services in the SOA diagram above). The requirements for this system are: (Note - I don't control these, they were given to me by management) Main workflow must interface with Excel spreadsheet, probably through VBA macros (to ease the transition to the new system) Alerts should integrate with MS Outlook, Lotus Notes, and SMS (text messages). We also want to interface it with the company Voice Mail system but that is not a "hard" requirement. Performance requirements: Must handle 250,000 Transactions Per Second Should be able to handle up to 20,000 employees (right now we have 3) 99.99% uptime ("four nines") expected Must be secure against outside hacking, but users cannot be required to enter a username/password. Platforms: Must support Windows XP/Vista/7, Linux, iPhone, Blackberry, DOS 2.0, VAX, IRIX, PDP-11, Apple IIc. Time to complete: 6 to 8 weeks. My questions are: Is this a good design for the system so far? Am I using all of the recommended best practices for these technologies? How do I integrate the Visio diagram above with the Windows Workflow Foundation to call the ConfigurationService and persist workflow changes? Am I missing any important components? Will this be extensible enough to support any scenario via end-user configuration? Will the system scale to the above performance requirements? Will we need any expensive hardware to run it? Are there any "gotchas" I should know about with respect to cross-platform compatibility? For example would it be difficult to convert this to an iPhone app? How long would you expect this to take? (We've dedicated 1 week for testing so I'm thinking maybe 5 weeks?)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102  | Next Page >