Search Results

Search found 6839 results on 274 pages for 'functional tests'.

Page 97/274 | < Previous Page | 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104  | Next Page >

• Windows Azure Use Case: Agility

  - by BuckWoody

  This is one in a series of posts on when and where to use a distributed architecture design in your organization's computing needs. You can find the main post here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2011/01/18/windows-azure-and-sql-azure-use-cases.aspx  Description: Agility in this context is defined as the ability to quickly develop and deploy an application. In theory, the speed at which your organization can develop and deploy an application on available hardware is identical to what you could deploy in a distributed environment. But in practice, this is not always the case. Having an option to use a distributed environment can be much faster for the deployment and even the development process. Implementation: When an organization designs code, they are essentially becoming a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) provider to their own organization. To do that, the IT operations team becomes the Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) to the development teams. From there, the software is developed and deployed using an Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) process. A simplified view of an ALM process is as follows: Requirements Analysis Design and Development Implementation Testing Deployment to Production Maintenance In an on-premise environment, this often equates to the following process map: Requirements Business requirements formed by Business Analysts, Developers and Data Professionals. Analysis Feasibility studies, including physical plant, security, manpower and other resources. Request is placed on the work task list if approved. Design and Development Code written according to organization’s chosen methodology, either on-premise or to multiple development teams on and off premise. Implementation Code checked into main branch. Code forked as needed. Testing Code deployed to on-premise Testing servers. If no server capacity available, more resources procured through standard budgeting and ordering processes. Manual and automated functional, load, security, etc. performed. Deployment to Production Server team involved to select platform and environments with available capacity. If no server capacity available, standard budgeting and procurement process followed. If no server capacity available, systems built, configured and put under standard organizational IT control. Systems configured for proper operating systems, patches, security and virus scans. System maintenance, HA/DR, backups and recovery plans configured and put into place. Maintenance Code changes evaluated and altered according to need. In a distributed computing environment like Windows Azure, the process maps a bit differently: Requirements Business requirements formed by Business Analysts, Developers and Data Professionals. Analysis Feasibility studies, including budget, security, manpower and other resources. Request is placed on the work task list if approved. Design and Development Code written according to organization’s chosen methodology, either on-premise or to multiple development teams on and off premise. Implementation Code checked into main branch. Code forked as needed. Testing Code deployed to Azure. Manual and automated functional, load, security, etc. performed. Deployment to Production Code deployed to Azure. Point in time backup and recovery plans configured and put into place.(HA/DR and automated backups already present in Azure fabric) Maintenance Code changes evaluated and altered according to need. This means that several steps can be removed or expedited. It also means that the business function requesting the application can be held directly responsible for the funding of that request, speeding the process further since the IT budgeting process may not be involved in the Azure scenario. An additional benefit is the “Azure Marketplace”, In effect this becomes an app store for Enterprises to select pre-defined code and data applications to mesh or bolt-in to their current code, possibly saving development time. Resources: Whitepaper download- What is ALM?  http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9743693  Whitepaper download - ALM and Business Strategy: http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9743690  LiveMeeting Recording on ALM and Windows Azure (registration required, but free): http://www.microsoft.com/uk/msdn/visualstudio/contact-us.aspx?sbj=Developing with Windows Azure (ALM perspective) - 10:00-11:00 - 19th Jan 2011

  Read the article

• Windows Azure Use Case: New Development

  - by BuckWoody

  This is one in a series of posts on when and where to use a distributed architecture design in your organization's computing needs. You can find the main post here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2011/01/18/windows-azure-and-sql-azure-use-cases.aspx Description: Computing platforms evolve over time. Originally computers were directed by hardware wiring - that, the “code” was the path of the wiring that directed an electrical signal from one component to another, or in some cases a physical switch controlled the path. From there software was developed, first in a very low machine language, then when compilers were created, computer languages could more closely mimic written statements. These language statements can be compiled into the lower-level machine language still used by computers today. Microprocessors replaced logic circuits, sometimes with fewer instructions (Reduced Instruction Set Computing, RISC) and sometimes with more instructions (Complex Instruction Set Computing, CISC). The reason this history is important is that along each technology advancement, computer code has adapted. Writing software for a RISC architecture is significantly different than developing for a CISC architecture. And moving to a Distributed Architecture like Windows Azure also has specific implementation details that our code must follow. But why make a change? As I’ve described, we need to make the change to our code to follow advances in technology. There’s no point in change for its own sake, but as a new paradigm offers benefits to our users, it’s important for us to leverage those benefits where it makes sense. That’s most often done in new development projects. It’s a far simpler task to take a new project and adapt it to Windows Azure than to try and retrofit older code designed in a previous computing environment. We can still use the same coding languages (.NET, Java, C++) to write code for Windows Azure, but we need to think about the architecture of that code on a new project so that it runs in the most efficient, cost-effective way in a Distributed Architecture. As we receive new requests from the organization for new projects, a distributed architecture paradigm belongs in the decision matrix for the platform target. Implementation: When you are designing new applications for Windows Azure (or any distributed architecture) there are many important details to consider. But at the risk of over-simplification, there are three main concepts to learn and architect within the new code: Stateless Programming - Stateless program is a prime concept within distributed architectures. Rather than each server owning the complete processing cycle, the information from an operation that needs to be retained (the “state”) should be persisted to another location c(like storage) common to all machines involved in the process.  An interesting learning process for Stateless Programming (although not unique to this language type) is to learn Functional Programming. Server-Side Processing - Along with developing using a Stateless Design, the closer you can locate the code processing to the data, the less expensive and faster the code will run. When you control the network layer, this is less important, since you can send vast amounts of data between the server and client, allowing the client to perform processing. In a distributed architecture, you don’t always own the network, so it’s performance is unpredictable. Also, you may not be able to control the platform the user is on (such as a smartphone, PC or tablet), so it’s imperative to deliver only results and graphical elements where possible.  Token-Based Authentication - Also called “Claims-Based Authorization”, this code practice means instead of allowing a user to log on once and then running code in that context, a more granular level of security is used. A “token” or “claim”, often represented as a Certificate, is sent along for a series or even one request. In other words, every call to the code is authenticated against the token, rather than allowing a user free reign within the code call. While this is more work initially, it can bring a greater level of security, and it is far more resilient to disconnections. Resources: See the references of “Nondistributed Deployment” and “Distributed Deployment” at the top of this article for more information with graphics:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee658120.aspx  Stack Overflow has a good thread on functional programming: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/844536/advantages-of-stateless-programming  Another good discussion on Stack Overflow on server-side processing is here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3064018/client-side-or-server-side-processing Claims Based Authorization is described here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee335707.aspx

  Read the article

• Windows Azure Use Case: New Development

  - by BuckWoody

  This is one in a series of posts on when and where to use a distributed architecture design in your organization's computing needs. You can find the main post here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2011/01/18/windows-azure-and-sql-azure-use-cases.aspx Description: Computing platforms evolve over time. Originally computers were directed by hardware wiring - that, the “code” was the path of the wiring that directed an electrical signal from one component to another, or in some cases a physical switch controlled the path. From there software was developed, first in a very low machine language, then when compilers were created, computer languages could more closely mimic written statements. These language statements can be compiled into the lower-level machine language still used by computers today. Microprocessors replaced logic circuits, sometimes with fewer instructions (Reduced Instruction Set Computing, RISC) and sometimes with more instructions (Complex Instruction Set Computing, CISC). The reason this history is important is that along each technology advancement, computer code has adapted. Writing software for a RISC architecture is significantly different than developing for a CISC architecture. And moving to a Distributed Architecture like Windows Azure also has specific implementation details that our code must follow. But why make a change? As I’ve described, we need to make the change to our code to follow advances in technology. There’s no point in change for its own sake, but as a new paradigm offers benefits to our users, it’s important for us to leverage those benefits where it makes sense. That’s most often done in new development projects. It’s a far simpler task to take a new project and adapt it to Windows Azure than to try and retrofit older code designed in a previous computing environment. We can still use the same coding languages (.NET, Java, C++) to write code for Windows Azure, but we need to think about the architecture of that code on a new project so that it runs in the most efficient, cost-effective way in a Distributed Architecture. As we receive new requests from the organization for new projects, a distributed architecture paradigm belongs in the decision matrix for the platform target. Implementation: When you are designing new applications for Windows Azure (or any distributed architecture) there are many important details to consider. But at the risk of over-simplification, there are three main concepts to learn and architect within the new code: Stateless Programming - Stateless program is a prime concept within distributed architectures. Rather than each server owning the complete processing cycle, the information from an operation that needs to be retained (the “state”) should be persisted to another location c(like storage) common to all machines involved in the process.  An interesting learning process for Stateless Programming (although not unique to this language type) is to learn Functional Programming. Server-Side Processing - Along with developing using a Stateless Design, the closer you can locate the code processing to the data, the less expensive and faster the code will run. When you control the network layer, this is less important, since you can send vast amounts of data between the server and client, allowing the client to perform processing. In a distributed architecture, you don’t always own the network, so it’s performance is unpredictable. Also, you may not be able to control the platform the user is on (such as a smartphone, PC or tablet), so it’s imperative to deliver only results and graphical elements where possible.  Token-Based Authentication - Also called “Claims-Based Authorization”, this code practice means instead of allowing a user to log on once and then running code in that context, a more granular level of security is used. A “token” or “claim”, often represented as a Certificate, is sent along for a series or even one request. In other words, every call to the code is authenticated against the token, rather than allowing a user free reign within the code call. While this is more work initially, it can bring a greater level of security, and it is far more resilient to disconnections. Resources: See the references of “Nondistributed Deployment” and “Distributed Deployment” at the top of this article for more information with graphics:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee658120.aspx  Stack Overflow has a good thread on functional programming: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/844536/advantages-of-stateless-programming  Another good discussion on Stack Overflow on server-side processing is here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3064018/client-side-or-server-side-processing Claims Based Authorization is described here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee335707.aspx

  Read the article

• Spritesheet per pixel collision XNA

  - by Jixi

  So basically i'm using this: public bool IntersectPixels(Rectangle rectangleA, Color[] dataA,Rectangle rectangleB, Color[] dataB) { int top = Math.Max(rectangleA.Top, rectangleB.Top); int bottom = Math.Min(rectangleA.Bottom, rectangleB.Bottom); int left = Math.Max(rectangleA.Left, rectangleB.Left); int right = Math.Min(rectangleA.Right, rectangleB.Right); for (int y = top; y < bottom; y++) { for (int x = left; x < right; x++) { Color colorA = dataA[(x - rectangleA.Left) + (y - rectangleA.Top) * rectangleA.Width]; Color colorB = dataB[(x - rectangleB.Left) + (y - rectangleB.Top) * rectangleB.Width]; if (colorA.A != 0 && colorB.A != 0) { return true; } } } return false; } In order to detect collision, but i'm unable to figure out how to use it with animated sprites. This is my animation update method: public void AnimUpdate(GameTime gameTime) { if (!animPaused) { animTimer += (float)gameTime.ElapsedGameTime.TotalMilliseconds; if (animTimer > animInterval) { currentFrame++; animTimer = 0f; } if (currentFrame > endFrame || endFrame <= currentFrame || currentFrame < startFrame) { currentFrame = startFrame; } objRect = new Rectangle(currentFrame * TextureWidth, frameRow * TextureHeight, TextureWidth, TextureHeight); origin = new Vector2(objRect.Width / 2, objRect.Height / 2); } } Which works with multiple rows and columns. and how i call the intersect: public bool IntersectPixels(Obj me, Vector2 pos, Obj o) { Rectangle collisionRect = new Rectangle(me.objRect.X, me.objRect.Y, me.objRect.Width, me.objRect.Height); collisionRect.X += (int)pos.X; collisionRect.Y += (int)pos.Y; if (IntersectPixels(collisionRect, me.TextureData, o.objRect, o.TextureData)) { return true; } return false; } Now my guess is that i have to update the textureData everytime the frame changes, no? If so then i already tried it and miserably failed doing so :P Any hints, advices? If you need to see any more of my code just let me know and i'll update the question. Updated almost functional collisionRect: collisionRect = new Rectangle((int)me.Position.X, (int)me.Position.Y, me.Texture.Width / (int)((me.frameCount - 1) * me.TextureWidth), me.Texture.Height); What it does now is "move" the block up 50%, shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Update: Alright, so here's a functional collision rectangle(besides the height issue) collisionRect = new Rectangle((int)me.Position.X, (int)me.Position.Y, me.TextureWidth / (int)me.frameCount - 1, me.TextureHeight); Now the problem is that using breakpoints i found out that it's still not getting the correct color values of the animated sprite. So it detects properly but the color values are always: R:0 G:0 B:0 A:0 ??? disregard that, it's not true afterall =P For some reason now the collision area height is only 1 pixel..

  Read the article

• Flow-Design Cheat Sheet &ndash; Part II, Translation

  - by Ralf Westphal

  In my previous post I summarized the notation for Flow-Design (FD) diagrams. Now is the time to show you how to translate those diagrams into code. Hopefully you feel how different this is from UML. UML leaves you alone with your sequence diagram or component diagram or activity diagram. They leave it to you how to translate your elaborate design into code. Or maybe UML thinks it´s so easy no further explanations are needed? I don´t know. I just know that, as soon as people stop designing with UML and start coding, things end up to be very different from the design. And that´s bad. That degrades graphical designs to just time waste on paper (or some designer). I even believe that´s the reason why most programmers view textual source code as the only and single source of truth. Design and code usually do not match. FD is trying to change that. It wants to make true design a first class method in every developers toolchest. For that the first prerequisite is to be able to easily translate any design into code. Mechanically, without thinking. Even a compiler could do it :-) (More of that in some other article.) Translating to Methods The first translation I want to show you is for small designs. When you start using FD you should translate your diagrams like this. Functional units become methods. That´s it. An input-pin becomes a method parameter, an output-pin becomes a return value: The above is a part. But a board can be translated likewise and calls the nested FUs in order: In any case be sure to keep the board method clear of any and all business logic. It should not contain any control structures like if, switch, or a loop. Boards do just one thing: calling nested functional units in proper sequence. What about multiple input-pins? Try to avoid them. Replace them with a join returning a tuple: What about multiple output-pins? Try to avoid them. Or return a tuple. Or use out-parameters: But as I said, this simple translation is for simple designs only. Splits and joins are easily done with method translation: All pretty straightforward, isn´t it. But what about wires, named pins, entry points, explicit dependencies? I suggest you don´t use this kind of translation when your designs need these features. Translating to methods is for small scale designs like you might do once you´re working on the implementation of a part of a larger design. Or maybe for a code kata you´re doing in your local coding dojo. Instead of doing TDD try doing FD and translate your design into methods. You´ll see that way it´s much easier to work collaboratively on designs, remember them more easily, keep them clean, and lessen the need for refactoring. Translating to Events [coming soon]

  Read the article

• An Actionable Common Approach to Federal Enterprise Architecture

  - by TedMcLaughlan

  The recent “Common Approach to Federal Enterprise Architecture” (US Executive Office of the President, May 2 2012) is extremely timely and well-organized guidance for the Federal IT investment and deployment community, as useful for Federal Departments and Agencies as it is for their stakeholders and integration partners. The guidance not only helps IT Program Planners and Managers, but also informs and prepares constituents who may be the beneficiaries or otherwise impacted by the investment. The FEA Common Approach extends from and builds on the rapidly-maturing Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) and its associated artifacts and standards, already included to a large degree in the annual Federal Portfolio and Investment Management processes – for example the OMB’s Exhibit 300 (i.e. Business Case justification for IT investments).A very interesting element of this Approach includes the very necessary guidance for actually using an Enterprise Architecture (EA) and/or its collateral – good guidance for any organization charged with maintaining a broad portfolio of IT investments. The associated FEA Reference Models (i.e. the BRM, DRM, TRM, etc.) are very helpful frameworks for organizing, understanding, communicating and standardizing across agencies with respect to vocabularies, architecture patterns and technology standards. Determining when, how and to what level of detail to include these reference models in the typically long-running Federal IT acquisition cycles wasn’t always clear, however, particularly during the first interactions of a Program’s technical and functional leadership with the Mission owners and investment planners. This typically occurs as an agency begins the process of describing its strategy and business case for allocation of new Federal funding, reacting to things like new legislation or policy, real or anticipated mission challenges, or straightforward ROI opportunities (for example the introduction of new technologies that deliver significant cost-savings).The early artifacts (i.e. Resource Allocation Plans, Acquisition Plans, Exhibit 300’s or other Business Case materials, etc.) of the intersection between Mission owners, IT and Program Managers are far easier to understand and discuss, when the overlay of an evolved, actionable Enterprise Architecture (such as the FEA) is applied.  “Actionable” is the key word – too many Public Service entity EA’s (including the FEA) have for too long been used simply as a very highly-abstracted standards reference, duly maintained and nominally-enforced by an Enterprise or System Architect’s office. Refreshing elements of this recent FEA Common Approach include one of the first Federally-documented acknowledgements of the “Solution Architect” (the “Problem-Solving” role). This role collaborates with the Enterprise, System and Business Architecture communities primarily on completing actual “EA Roadmap” documents. These are roadmaps grounded in real cost, technical and functional details that are fully aligned with both contextual expectations (for example the new “Digital Government Strategy” and its required roadmap deliverables - and the rapidly increasing complexities of today’s more portable and transparent IT solutions.  We also expect some very critical synergies to develop in early IT investment cycles between this new breed of “Federal Enterprise Solution Architect” and the first waves of the newly-formal “Federal IT Program Manager” roles operating under more standardized “critical competency” expectations (including EA), likely already to be seriously influencing the quality annual CPIC (Capital Planning and Investment Control) processes.  Our Oracle Enterprise Strategy Team (EST) and associated Oracle Enterprise Architecture (OEA) practices are already engaged in promoting and leveraging the visibility of Enterprise Architecture as a key contributor to early IT investment validation, and we look forward in particular to seeing the real, citizen-centric benefits of this FEA Common Approach in particular surface across the entire Public Service CPIC domain - Federal, State, Local, Tribal and otherwise. Read more Enterprise Architecture blog posts for additional EA insight!

  Read the article

• Learn Many Languages

  - by Jeff Foster

  My previous blog, Deliberate Practice, discussed the need for developers to “sharpen their pencil” continually, by setting aside time to learn how to tackle problems in different ways. However, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, a contested and somewhat-controversial concept from language theory, seems to hold reasonably true when applied to programming languages. It states that: “The structure of a language affects the ways in which its speakers conceptualize their world.” If you’re constrained by a single programming language, the one that dominates your day job, then you only have the tools of that language at your disposal to think about and solve a problem. For example, if you’ve only ever worked with Java, you would never think of passing a function to a method. A good developer needs to learn many languages. You may never deploy them in production, you may never ship code with them, but by learning a new language, you’ll have new ideas that will transfer to your current “day-job” language. With the abundant choices in programming languages, how does one choose which to learn? Alan Perlis sums it up best. “A language that doesn‘t affect the way you think about programming is not worth knowing“ With that in mind, here’s a selection of languages that I think are worth learning and that have certainly changed the way I think about tackling programming problems. Clojure Clojure is a Lisp-based language running on the Java Virtual Machine. The unique property of Lisp is homoiconicity, which means that a Lisp program is a Lisp data structure, and vice-versa. Since we can treat Lisp programs as Lisp data structures, we can write our code generation in the same style as our code. This gives Lisp a uniquely powerful macro system, and makes it ideal for implementing domain specific languages. Clojure also makes software transactional memory a first-class citizen, giving us a new approach to concurrency and dealing with the problems of shared state. Haskell Haskell is a strongly typed, functional programming language. Haskell’s type system is far richer than C# or Java, and allows us to push more of our application logic to compile-time safety. If it compiles, it usually works! Haskell is also a lazy language – we can work with infinite data structures. For example, in a board game we can generate the complete game tree, even if there are billions of possibilities, because the values are computed only as they are needed. Erlang Erlang is a functional language with a strong emphasis on reliability. Erlang’s approach to concurrency uses message passing instead of shared variables, with strong support from both the language itself and the virtual machine. Processes are extremely lightweight, and garbage collection doesn’t require all processes to be paused at the same time, making it feasible for a single program to use millions of processes at once, all without the mental overhead of managing shared state. The Benefits of Multilingualism By studying new languages, even if you won’t ever get the chance to use them in production, you will find yourself open to new ideas and ways of coding in your main language. For example, studying Haskell has taught me that you can do so much more with types and has changed my programming style in C#. A type represents some state a program should have, and a type should not be able to represent an invalid state. I often find myself refactoring methods like this… void SomeMethod(bool doThis, bool doThat) { if (!(doThis ^ doThat)) throw new ArgumentException(“At least one arg should be true”); if (doThis) DoThis(); if (doThat) DoThat(); } …into a type-based solution, like this: enum Action { DoThis, DoThat, Both }; void SomeMethod(Action action) { if (action == Action.DoThis || action == Action.Both) DoThis(); if (action == Action.DoThat || action == Action.Both) DoThat(); } At this point, I’ve removed the runtime exception in favor of a compile-time check. This is a trivial example, but is just one of many ideas that I’ve taken from one language and implemented in another.

  Read the article

• Incentivizing Work with Development Teams

  - by MarkPearl

  Recently I saw someone on twitter asking about incentives and if anyone had past experience with incentivizing work. I promised to respond with some of the experiences I have had in the past so here goes... **Disclaimer** - these are my experiences with incentives, generally in software development - in some other industries this may not be applicable – this is also my thinking at this point in time, with more experience my opinion may change. Incentivize at the level that you want people to group at If you are wanting to promote a team mentality, incentivize teams. If you want to promote an individual mentality, incentivize individuals. There is nothing worse than mixing this up. Some organizations put a lot of effort in establishing teams and team mentalities but reward individuals. This has a counter effect on the resources they have put towards establishing a team mentality. In the software projects that I work with we want promote cross functional teams that collaborate. Personally, if I was on a team and knew that there was an opportunity to work on a critical component of the system, and that by doing so I would get a bigger bonus, then I would be hesitant to include other people in solving that problem. Thus, I would hinder the teams efforts in being cross functional and reduce collaboration levels. Does that mean everyone in the team should get an even share of an incentive? In most situations I would say yes - even though this may feel counter-intuitive. I have heard arguments put forward that if “person x contributed more than person Y then they should be rewarded more” – This may sound controversial but I would rather treat people how would you like them to perform, not where they currently are at. To add to this approach, if someone is free loading, you bet your bottom dollar that the team is going to make this a lot more transparent if they feel that individual is going to be rewarded at the same level that everyone else is. Bad incentives promote destructive work If you are going to incentivize people, pick you incentives very carefully. I had an experience once with a sales person who was told they would get a bonus provided that they met an ordering target with a particular supplier. What did this person do? They sold everything at cost for the next month or so. They reached the goal, but the company didn't gain anything from it. It was a bad incentive. Expect the same with development teams, if you incentivize zero bug levels, you will get zero code committed to the solution. If you incentivize lines of code, you will get many many lines of bad code. Is there such a thing as a good incentives? Monetary wise, I am not sure there is. I would much rather encourage organizations to pay their people what they are worth upfront. I would also advise against paying money to teams as an incentive or even a bonus or reward for reaching a milestone. Rather have a breakaway for the team that promotes team building as a reward if they reach a milestone than pay them more money. I would also advise against making the incentive the reason for them to reach the milestone. If this becomes the norm it promotes people to begin to only do their job if there is an incentive at the end of the line. This is not a behaviour one wants to encourage. If the team or individual is in the right mind-set, they should not work any harder than they are right now with normal pay.

  Read the article

• Collaborative Organizations build Organizational Culture

  “A Collaborative organization builds its culture based on the idea of the family or an athletic team.”(Hoefling, 2001) As I grew up, I participated in many different types of clubs, civic organizations, and sports teams.  Now looking back at the more successful undertakings, I can see three commonalities amongst them. They all shared a defined purpose or goal, defined functional roles, and a shared sense of responsibility to the group. Defined Purpose or Goal In order to unit people to work together, they must share a common goal or have a common purpose. An example of this would be the Lions Club International Foundation. There purpose is to help everyone to lead healthier and more productive lives, nurtures the potential of youth, promotes health, serves the elderly, empowers the disabled and helps victims of disasters. This organization holds localized meetings across the world and works in conjunction with other localized clubs within there organization along with other organizations to promote common goals. If there are no common goals for the group, then there is nothing that binds people to the group, and nothing will be done. Defined Functional Roles In order for an organization to work and function as a team, they must have defined roles and everyone must know how their roles are interdependent on each other. Lets shed light on this subject by looking at a football team’s offense.  Each player has an assigned role to play each time the ball is snapped. The offensive line blocks for the running back or quarterback, the quarterback passes the ball to the wide receiver or hands it off to the running back and the running back and wide receivers run with the ball towards the goal line. Each member of this team shares a common goal of scoring a touchdown, but if each team member does not fulfill their assigned roles the offences will collapse and the team will lose yards. This will provide a set back to the teams goal of scoring a touchdown because they potential are then farther away from the goal line.  In addition, if all the players do not know their roles and how they are part of a larger team then even larger yard losses can occur. Shared Sense of Personal Responsibility to the Group Shared responsibility comes with the shared common goals. Each person in the organization must do their part to promote the common shared goal or purpose based on their abilities. A prime example of this is a wrestling team competing in a match. Points are awarded to the team based on how many wins the team achieves in the meet and of that how many wins where won by decision or by pin. If a wrestler pins his opponent the teams will receive 2 points for the win, but if the wrestler wins by decision, then the team only gets one point for the win. So it is the responsibility of each person on the team to not get pinned if they are unable to win the match. If the team member gets pinned then the other team receives an additional point for the win. References: Hoefling, T. (2001). Working Virtually: Managing People for Successful Virtual Teams and Organizations. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

  Read the article

• When should I use a Process Model versus a Use Case?

  - by Dave Burke

  This Blog entry is a follow on to https://blogs.oracle.com/oum/entry/oum_is_business_process_and and addresses a question I sometimes get asked…..i.e. “when I am gathering requirements on a Project, should I use a Process Modeling approach, or should I use a Use Case approach?” Not surprisingly, the short answer is “it depends”! Let’s take a scenario where you are working on a Sales Force Automation project. We’ll call the process that is being implemented “Lead-to-Order”. I would typically think of this type of project as being “Process Centric”. In other words, the focus will be on orchestrating a series of human and system related tasks that ultimately deliver value to the business in a cost effective way. Put in even simpler terms……implement an automated pre-sales system. For this type of (Process Centric) project, requirements would typically be gathered through a series of Workshops where the focal point will be on creating, or confirming, the Future-State (To-Be) business process. If pre-defined “best-practice” business process models exist, then of course they could and should be used during the Workshops, but even in their absence, the focus of the Workshops will be to define the optimum series of Tasks, their connections, sequence, and dependencies that will ultimately reflect a business process that meets the needs of the business. Now let’s take another scenario. Assume you are working on a Content Management project that involves automating the creation and management of content for User Manuals, Web Sites, Social Media publications etc. Would you call this type of project “Process Centric”?.......well you could, but it might also fall into the category of complex configuration, plus some custom extensions to a standard software application (COTS). For this type of project it would certainly be worth considering using a Use Case approach in order to 1) understand the requirements, and 2) to capture the functional requirements of the custom extensions. At this point you might be asking “why couldn’t I use a Process Modeling approach for my Content Management project?” Well, of course you could, but you just need to think about which approach is the most effective. Start by analyzing the types of Tasks that will eventually be automated by the system, for example: Best Suited To? Task Name Process Model Use Case Notes Manage outbound calls Ö A series of linked human and system tasks for calling and following up with prospects Manage content revision Ö Updating the content on a website Update User Preferences Ö Updating a users display preferences Assign Lead Ö Reviewing a lead, then assigning it to a sales person Convert Lead to Quote Ö Updating the status of a lead, and then converting it to a sales order As you can see, it’s not an exact science, and either approach is viable for the Tasks listed above. However, where you have a series of interconnected Tasks or Activities, than when combined, deliver value to the business, then that would be a good indicator to lead with a Process Modeling approach. On the other hand, when the Tasks or Activities in question are more isolated and/or do not cross traditional departmental boundaries, then a Use Case approach might be worth considering. Now let’s take one final scenario….. As you captured the To-Be Process flows for the Sales Force automation project, you discover a “Gap” in terms of what the client requires, and what the standard COTS application can provide. Let’s assume that the only way forward is to develop a Custom Extension. This would now be a perfect opportunity to document the functional requirements (behind the Gap) using a Use Case approach. After all, we will be developing some new software, and one of the most effective ways to begin the Software Development Lifecycle is to follow a Use Case approach. As always, your comments are most welcome.

  Read the article

• Don’t string together XML

  - by KyleBurns

  XML has been a pervasive tool in software development for over a decade.  It provides a way to communicate data in a manner that is simple to understand and free of platform dependencies.  Also pervasive in software development is what I consider to be the anti-pattern of using string manipulation to create XML.  This usually starts with a “quick and dirty” approach because you need an XML document and looks like (for all of the examples here, we’ll assume we’re writing the body of a method intended to take a Contact object and return an XML string): return string.Format("<Contact><BusinessName>{0}</BusinessName></Contact>", contact.BusinessName);   In the code example, I created (or at least believe I created) an XML document representing a simple contact object in one line of code with very little overhead.  Work’s done, right?  No it’s not.  You see, what I didn’t realize was that this code would be used in the real world instead of my fantasy world where I own all the data and can prevent any of it containing problematic values.  If I use this code to create a contact record for the business “Sanford & Son”, any XML parser will be incapable of processing the data because the ampersand is special in XML and should have been encoded as &amp;. Following the pattern that I have seen many times over, my next step as a developer is going to be to do what any developer in his right mind would do – instruct the user that ampersands are “bad” and they cannot be used without breaking computers.  This may work in many cases and is often accompanied by logic at the UI layer of applications to block these “bad” characters, but sooner or later someone is going to figure out that other applications allow for them and will want the same.  This often leads to the creation of “cleaner” functions that perform a replace on the strings for every special character that the person writing the function can think of.  The cleaner function will usually grow over time as support requests reveal characters that were missed in the initial cut.  Sooner or later you end up writing your own somewhat functional XML engine. I have never been told by anyone paying me to write code that they would like to buy a somewhat functional XML engine.  My employer/customer’s needs have always been for something that may use XML, but ultimately is functionality that drives business value. I’m not going to build an XML engine. So how can I generate XML that is always well-formed without writing my own engine?  Easy – use one of the ones provided to you for free!  If you’re in a shop that still supports VB6 applications, you can use the DomDocument or MXXMLWriter object (of the two I prefer MXXMLWriter, but I’m not going to fully describe either here).  For .Net Framework applications prior to the 3.5 framework, the code is a little more verbose than I would like, but easy once you understand what pieces are required:             using (StringWriter sw = new StringWriter())             {                 using (XmlTextWriter writer = new XmlTextWriter(sw))                 {                     writer.WriteStartDocument();                     writer.WriteStartElement("Contact");                     writer.WriteElementString("BusinessName", contact.BusinessName);                     writer.WriteEndElement(); // end Contact element                     writer.WriteEndDocument();                     writer.Flush();                     return sw.ToString();                 }             }   Looking at that code, it’s easy to understand why people are drawn to the initial one-liner.  Lucky for us, the 3.5 .Net Framework added the System.Xml.Linq.XElement object.  This object takes away a lot of the complexity present in the XmlTextWriter approach and allows us to generate the document as follows: return new XElement("Contact", new XElement("BusinessName", contact.BusinessName)).ToString();   While it is very common for people to use string manipulation to create XML, I’ve discussed here reasons not to use this method and introduced powerful APIs that are built into the .Net Framework as an alternative.  I’ve given a very simplistic example here to highlight the most basic XML generation task.  For more information on the XmlTextWriter and XElement APIs, check out the MSDN library.

  Read the article

• Why am I getting "ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (1 for 0)" when running my rails function

  - by Hisham

  I'm stumped on what's causing this. I get this error and stack trace in all my functional tests where I call 'post'. Here is the full stack trace: 7) Error: test_should_validate(UsersControllerTest): ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (1 for 0) /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route.rb:48:in `to_query' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route.rb:48:in `build_query_string' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route.rb:46:in `each' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route.rb:46:in `build_query_string' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route.rb:233:in `append_query_string' generated code (/Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route.rb:154):3:in `generate' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route_set.rb:365:in `__send__' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route_set.rb:365:in `generate' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route_set.rb:364:in `each' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/routing/route_set.rb:364:in `generate' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/url_rewriter.rb:208:in `rewrite_path' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/url_rewriter.rb:187:in `rewrite_url' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/url_rewriter.rb:165:in `rewrite' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/test_process.rb:450:in `build_request_uri' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/test_process.rb:406:in `process' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/test_process.rb:376:in `post' functional/users_controller_test.rb:57:in `test_should_validate' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/testing/setup_and_teardown.rb:60:in `__send__' /Users/hisham/src/rails/ftuBackend/vendor/rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/testing/setup_and_teardown.rb:60:in `run' This is the test I'm running: def test_should_validate post :validate, :user => { :email => '[email protected]', :password => 'quire', :password_confirmation => 'quire', :agreed_to_terms => "true" } assert assigns(:user).errors.empty? assert_response :success end

  Read the article

• Trouble move-capturing std::unique_ptr in a lambda using std::bind

  - by user2478832

  I'd like to capture a variable of type std::vector<std::unique_ptr<MyClass>> in a lambda expression (in other words, "capture by move"). I found a solution which uses std::bind to capture unique_ptr (http://stackoverflow.com/a/12744730/2478832) and decided to use it as a starting point. However, the most simplified version of the proposed code I could get doesn't compile (lots of template mistakes, it seems to try to call unique_ptr's copy constructor). #include <functional> #include <memory> std::function<void ()> a(std::unique_ptr<int>&& param) { return std::bind( [] (int* p) {}, std::move(param)); } int main() { a(std::unique_ptr<int>(new int())); } Can anybody point out what is wrong with this code? EDIT: tried changing the lambda to take a reference to unique_ptr, it still doesn't compile. #include <functional> #include <memory> std::function<void ()> a(std::unique_ptr<int>&& param) { return std::bind( [] (std::unique_ptr<int>& p) {}, // also as a const reference std::move(param)); } int main() { a(std::unique_ptr<int>(new int())); }

  Read the article

• Routing audio from GSM module to a Bluetooth HandsFree device

  - by Shaihi

  I have a system with the following setup: I use: Windows CE 6 R3 Microsoft's Bluetooth stack including all profiles Motorola H500 The Audio Gateway service is up and running (checked through services list in cmd) GSM Module is functional - I am able to set outgoing calls and to answer calls. Bluetooth is functional - the A2DP profile plays music to Motorola headphones (can't remember the model right now) I want to hold a conversation using a headset device. I have included all Bluetooth components in the catalog. I pair the device using the Control Panel applet. When I press the button on the Motorla device to answer a call I get a print by the Audio Gateway: BTAGSVC: ConnectionEvent. BTAGSVC: SCOListenThread_Int - Connection Event. BTAGSVC: ConnectionEvent. BTAGSVC: SCOListenThread_Int - Connection Event. BTAGSVC: ConnectionEvent. BTAGSVC: A Bluetooth peer device has connected to the Audio Gateway. BTAGSVC: Could not open registry key for BT Addr: 2. BTAGSVC: The peer device was not accepted since the user has never confirmed it as a device to be used. So my questions are as follows: What do I need to do to pair the device with the Audio Gateway? Once my device is paired, do I need to set anything else up? (except for the GSM module of course)

  Read the article

• Types issue in F#

  - by Andry

  Hello! In my ongoing adventure deep diving into f# I am understanding a lot of this powerful language but there are things that I still do not understand so clearly. One of the most important issues I need to master is types. Well the book I am reading is very straight forward and introduces entities and main functionalities with a direct approach. The first thing I could get start with is types. It introduces the main types as list, option, tuples, and so on... It is clearly underlined that all these types are IMMUTABLE for many reasons regarding functional programming and data consistance in functional programing. Well, no problems until now... But now I am getting started with Concrete Types... Well... I have problems in managing with types like list, option, tuples, types created through new operator and concrete types created using type keyword (for abbreviations, concrete types...). So my question is: how can I efficently catalogue/distinguish all types of data in f#???? I can create a perfect separation among types in C#, VB.NET... FOr example in VB.NET there are value and reference types while in C# there are only references and also int, double are treated as objects (they are objects while in VB.NET a value type is not a object and there is a split in types for this reason). Well in F# I cannot create such differences among types in the language. Can you help me? I hope I was clear.

  Read the article

• How can I detect if this dictionary key exists in C#?

  - by Adam Tuttle

  I am working with the Exchange Web Services Managed API, with contact data. I have the following code, which is functional, but not ideal: foreach (Contact c in contactList) { string openItemUrl = "https://" + service.Url.Host + "/owa/" + c.WebClientReadFormQueryString; row = table.NewRow(); row["FileAs"] = c.FileAs; row["GivenName"] = c.GivenName; row["Surname"] = c.Surname; row["CompanyName"] = c.CompanyName; row["Link"] = openItemUrl; //home address try { row["HomeStreet"] = c.PhysicalAddresses[PhysicalAddressKey.Home].Street.ToString(); } catch (Exception e) { } try { row["HomeCity"] = c.PhysicalAddresses[PhysicalAddressKey.Home].City.ToString(); } catch (Exception e) { } try { row["HomeState"] = c.PhysicalAddresses[PhysicalAddressKey.Home].State.ToString(); } catch (Exception e) { } try { row["HomeZip"] = c.PhysicalAddresses[PhysicalAddressKey.Home].PostalCode.ToString(); } catch (Exception e) { } try { row["HomeCountry"] = c.PhysicalAddresses[PhysicalAddressKey.Home].CountryOrRegion.ToString(); } catch (Exception e) { } //and so on for all kinds of other contact-related fields... } As I said, this code works. Now I want to make it suck a little less, if possible. I can't find any methods that allow me to check for the existence of the key in the dictionary before attempting to access it, and if I try to read it (with .ToString()) and it doesn't exist then an exception is thrown: 500 The given key was not present in the dictionary. How can I refactor this code to suck less (while still being functional)?

  Read the article

• inserting a form to session raises picklingerror - django

  - by shanyu

  I receive an exception when I add a form to the session: PicklingError: Can't pickle <class 'django.utils.functional.__proxy__'>: attribute lookup django.utils.functional.__proxy__ failed The form includes a few simple fields and has some javascript attached to a widget. It might be that Django forms cannot be pickled at all, but the exception seems to point to unicode lazy translation. To test further, I have also tried to insert only the form errors (an errordict) to the session and received the same error. I appreciate some help here, thanks in advance. EDIT: Here's why I insert a form into the session: I have an app that has a form. This form is rendered by a template tag in another app. When posted, if the form is valid, no problem, I do stuff and redirect to "next". However if it is not valid, I want to go back to the posting page to show errors. Recall that the comments app in this case redirects to an intermediate "hey, please fix the errors" page. I am trying to avoid this, and hence redirect back to the posting page with the form and its errors in the session that the template tag will render.

  Read the article

• [F#] Parallelize code in nested loops

  - by Juliet

  You always hear that functional code is inherently easier to parallelize than non-functional code, so I decided to write a function which does the following: Given a input of strings, total up the number of unique characters for each string. So, given the input [ "aaaaa"; "bbb"; "ccccccc"; "abbbc" ], our method will returns a: 6; b: 6; c: 8. Here's what I've written: (* seq<#seq<char>> -> Map<char,int> *) let wordFrequency input = input |> Seq.fold (fun acc text -> (* This inner loop can be processed on its own thread *) text |> Seq.choose (fun char -> if Char.IsLetter char then Some(char) else None) |> Seq.fold (fun (acc : Map<_,_>) item -> match acc.TryFind(item) with | Some(count) -> acc.Add(item, count + 1) | None -> acc.Add(item, 1)) acc ) Map.empty This code is ideally parallelizable, because each string in input can be processed on its own thread. Its not as straightforward as it looks since the innerloop adds items to a Map shared between all of the inputs. I'd like the inner loop factored out into its own thread, and I don't want to use any mutable state. How would I re-write this function using an Async workflow?

  Read the article

• git commit best practices

  - by Ivan Z. Siu

  I am using git to manage a C++ project. When I am working on the projects, I find it hard to organize the changes into commits when changing things that are related to many places. For example, I may change a class interface in a .h file, which will affect the corresponding .cpp file, and also other files using it. I am not sure whether it is reasonable to put all the stuff into one big commit. Intuitively, I think the commits should be modular, each one of them corresponds to a functional update/change, so that the collaborators could pick things accordingly. But seems that sometimes it is inevitable to include lots of files and changes to make a functional change actually work. Searching did not yield me any good suggestion or tips. Hence I wonder if anyone could give me some best practices when doing commits. Thanks! PS. I've been using git for a while and I know how to interactively add/rebase/split/amend/... What I am asking is the PHILOSOPHY part.

  Read the article

• WSDL first for existing service layer

  - by Jurgen H

  I am working on an existing Java project with a typical services - dao setup for which only a webapplication was available. My job is to add webservices on top of the services layer, but the webservices have their own functional analysis and datamodel. The functional analyses ofcource focuses on what is possible in the different service methods. As good practice demands, we used the WSDL first strategy and generated JAXB bound Java classes and a SEI for the webservices. After having implemented the webservices partially, we noticed a 70% match between the datamodel. This resulted in writing converters which take the webservice JAXB classes and map them with the service layer classes. Customer customer = new Customer(); customer.setName(wsCustomer.getName()); customer.setFirstName(wsCustomer.getFirstName(); .. This is a very obvious example, some other mappings where little more complicated. Can anyone give his best practices, experiences, solutions to this kind of situations? Are any of these frameworks usefull? http://transmorph.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page http://ezmorph.sourceforge.net/ Please don't start a discussion about WSDL first vs code first.

  Read the article

• Jquery failure after site went live

  - by Brandon Condrey

  I have been designing a site for weeks using JQuery. I don't have a local server or a testing server so I just created a directory through FTP, '/testing'. Everything was working great in the testing directory. I attempted to go live tonight by moving all the files in '/testing' to the root directory and I changed all file paths and script sources accordingly. The site loads, but everything related to JQuery is non-functional. Javascript console gives errors of (just as an example from a plugin): '$.os.name' is not a function I'm at loss for what to do. I changed the paths referencing the JQuery library, installed a fresh copy of JQuery (to a new directory), etc. There is a wordpress installation in a different directory '/blog'. I've read about some compatibility issues with wordpress, but that seems to be related to using JQuery inside wordpress, which I am not. I'm not sure if any code would be beneficial since it was all functional in a different directory. Your help is greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• ForEach loop in Mathematica.

  - by dreeves

  I'd like something like this: ForEach[i_, {1,2,3}, Print[i] ] Or, more generally, to destructure arbitrary stuff in the list you're looping over, like: ForEach[{i_, j_}, {{1,10}, {2,20}, {3,30}}, Print[i*j] ] (Meta-question: is that a good way to call a ForEach loop, with the first argument a pattern like that?) ADDED: Some answerers have rightly pointed out that usually you want to use Map or other purely functional constructs and eschew a non-functional programming style where you use side effects. I agree! But here's an example where I think this ForEach construct is supremely useful: Say I have a list of options (rules) that pair symbols with expressions, like attrVals = {a -> 7, b -> 8, c -> 9} Now I want to make a hash table where I do the obvious mapping of those symbols to those numbers. I don't think there's a cleaner way to do that than ForEach[a_ -> v_, attrVals, h[a] = v] ADDED: I just realized that to do ForEach properly, it should support Break[] and Continue[]. I'm not sure how to implement that. Perhaps it will need to somehow be implemented in terms of For, While, or Do since those are the only loop constructs that support Break[] and Continue[]. If anyone interested in this wants to ask about that as a separate question, please do!

  Read the article

• Coding the R-ight way - avoiding the for loop

  - by mropa

  I am going through one of my .R files and by cleaning it up a little bit I am trying to get more familiar with writing the code the r-ight way. As a beginner, one of my favorite starting points is to get rid of the for() loops and try to transform the expression into a functional programming form. So here is the scenario: I am assembling a bunch of data.frames into a list for later usage. dataList <- list (dataA, dataB, dataC, dataD, dataE ) Now I like to take a look at each data.frame's column names and substitute certain character strings. Eg I like to substitute each "foo" and "bar" with "baz". At the moment I am getting the job done with a for() loop which looks a bit awkward. colnames(dataList[[1]]) [1] "foo" "code" "lp15" "bar" "lh15" colnames(dataList[[2]]) [1] "a" "code" "lp50" "ls50" "foo" matchVec <- c("foo", "bar") for (i in seq(dataList)) { for (j in seq(matchVec)) { colnames (dataList[[i]])[grep(pattern=matchVec[j], x=colnames (dataList[[i]]))] <- c("baz") } } Since I am working here with a list I thought about the lapply function. My attempts handling the job with the lapply function all seem to look alright but only at first sight. If I write f <- function(i, xList) { gsub(pattern=c("foo"), replacement=c("baz"), x=colnames(xList[[i]])) } lapply(seq(dataList), f, xList=dataList) the last line prints out almost what I am looking for. However, if i take another look at the actual names of the data.frames in dataList: lapply (dataList, colnames) I see that no changes have been made to the initial character strings. So how can I rewrite the for() loop and transform it into a functional programming form? And how do I substitute both strings, "foo" and "bar", in an efficient way? Since the gsub() function takes as its pattern argument only a character vector of length one.

  Read the article

• What's the best way to link formal specs to JIRA enchancement requests?

  - by Adam

  What's the best way to link formal specs to JIRA enhancement requests? I want to track changes to specifications using JIRA. Ideally, I'd like to refer to a functional ID reference in a JIRA ticket (e.g. MYAPPAPPROVAL LOGICMAIN SCREEN), so that program managers can retrospectively categorise defects. The reason for this, is so that QA scripts and documentation tickets can be searched/categorised meaningfully in the tracking system. There seems to be a million possible ways to do this, e.g. should I write a custom component to select functional IDs from a tree? should I write the specs in confluence, or another CMS with a TrackBack facility? should I include a link to the documentation URL? should I use some other 3rd party plugin application? should I use some Atlassian application that i'm unaware of? am I using the wrong tracking tool/process to measure spec growth? What's the best way, in your experience?

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 R2 DFSR Backlog Troubleshooting - Where to look for the cause of the problem?

  - by caleban

  Our target server indicates it has hundreds of thousands of backlogged transactions. Our authoritative source server indicates it has no backlogged transactions. No replication is taking place. Tests with plain text files aren't replicating. dfsdiag propogation tests fail to propogate. I've restarted the DFS services. I've restarted the servers. I've created new DFS shares to test with. The authoritative source server indicates it has no backlogs and the target indicates it has backlogs (which are the files it's waiting to receive). Files don't replicate in either direction. 2x Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard servers One server is at each of two sites The DFSR shares are on each respective server \site_1_server_1\users \site_2_server_1\users The sites are connected by a T1 DFSR worked for a week. I added a new share, another folder on the same servers, and that replicated for a weekend but never finished. Then all replication stopped. Is Windows DFSR flaky? What tools should I use and what should I look at to identify what's causing this problem?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104  | Next Page >