Search Results

Search found 5 results on 1 pages for 'tomwilsonfl'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Sluggish Windows SBS 2003

  - by TomWilsonFL

  One of my customers has a Windows 2003 Small Business Server which at this point is basically the DC, DNS, Fileserver and Symantec Protection Manager. I have disabled Exchange because I moved their mail to Google Apps. The server is extremely sluggish when doing anything. It is most noticeable when a dialog box is open (say the System properties), and you try to change tabs. This is usually instant, but on this machine can take 3-5 seconds. What additional services / packages can I uninstall from this machine knowing that it is only performing the above roles? Will removing the "Small Business Server" package in Add / Remove Programs get rid of a few unnecessary things? Any other thoughts? P.S. I know Symantec Endpoint and the Protection Manager are hogs, but I have nothing to replace the solution with at the moment. Thanks, Tom UPDATE: I looked over the different performance metrics, but nothing stood out as a problem. One of my friends mentioned Symantec's log and temp files can get quite huge and slow things down, so I ran CCleaner on the machine and found close to 3 GB of Symantec "stuff." Removed that and now the machine is MUCH better. I am still unsure why the data just sitting there would cause such a slowdown. The drive is not even near full. The only thing I can imagine is that Symantec must have to run through this stuff now and then.

  Read the article

• Boot drive not found issue after cloning using Apricorn EZgig

  - by TomWilsonFL

  A couple days ago I cloned a drive for someone using the EZgig software. Usually this goes without a hitch, but this particular drive I was cloning is quite old. When I restarted with the new drive I received the typical bootable disk not found message, so I turned it off, messed with the BIOS, restarted and it came up fine. That night I was working remotely on the computer and had to restart it. It didn't come back up; not a good sign. When the user came to the computer in the morning it was giving the same message. I have found that to make the computer boot, all I have to do is go into the BIOS and "Load Defaults", then restart. It will boot and runs great. Any thoughts on what is causing this situation? Is it MBR corruption? Are some settings being saved in the CMOS? A couple points of mention: I have already attempted looking for a BIOS update for the computer, but the newest is already installed (from 2003). When the computer reboots it either shows "None" for Primary Master, or sometimes it will just not show anything. Thanks, Tom

  Read the article

• Binding jQuery UI plugin after $.load

  - by TomWilsonFL

  I have a function that attaches the jQuery UI DatePicker (with my options) to a passed jQuery object: function bindDatepicker($obj) { if ($obj == null) $obj = $("input.date"); $obj.datepicker( { appendText: '(yyyy-mm-dd)', autoSize: true, changeMonth: true, changeYear: true, closeText: 'Done', dateFormat: 'yy-mm-dd', defaultDate: '+1m', minDate: +1, numberOfMonths: 2 } ); } I call this at the beginning of every page to bind it to input elements: $(function() { bindDatepicker($("input.date")); }); This works fine. My problem comes in when I load form elements using $.load(). I cannot attach the DatePicker to any of the loaded elements. For example: $("#id").load("urlToLoad", function() { bindDatepicker($("input.date")); }); Loads the form elements into a div just fine, but will not attach the DatePicker. Why is this? I am stumped. :( Thanks, Tom

  Read the article

• Using Doctrine to abstract CRUD operations

  - by TomWilsonFL

  This has bothered me for quite a while, but now it is necessity that I find the answer. We are working on quite a large project using CodeIgniter plus Doctrine. Our application has a front end and also an admin area for the company to check/change/delete data. When we designed the front end, we simply consumed most of the Doctrine code right in the controller: //In semi-pseudocode function register() { $data = get_post_data(); if (count($data) && isValid($data)) { $U = new User(); $U->fromArray($data); $U->save(); $C = new Customer(); $C->fromArray($data); $C->user_id = $U->id; $C->save(); redirect_to_next_step(); } } Obviously when we went to do the admin views code duplication began and considering we were in a "get it DONE" mode so it now stinks with code bloat. I have moved a lot of functionality (business logic) into the model using model methods, but the basic CRUD does not fit there. I was going to attempt to place the CRUD into static methods, i.e. Customer::save($array) [would perform both insert and update depending on if prikey is present in array], Customer::delete($id), Customer::getObj($id = false) [if false, get all data]. This is going to become painful though for 32 model objects (and growing). Also, at times models need to interact (as the interaction above between user data and customer data), which can't be done in a static method without breaking encapsulation. I envision adding another layer to this (exposing web services), so knowing there are going to be 3 "controllers" at some point I need to encapsulate this CRUD somewhere (obviously), but are static methods the way to go, or is there another road? Your input is much appreciated.

  Read the article

• Using NULLs in matchup table

  - by TomWilsonFL

  I am working on the accounting portion of a reservation system (think limo company). In the system there are multiple objects that can either be paid or submit a payment. I am tracking all of these "transactions" in three tables called: tx, tx_cc, and tx_ch. tx generates a new tx_id (for transaction ID) and keeps the information about amount, validity, etc. Tx_cc and tx_ch keep the information about the credit card or check used, respectively, which link to other tables (credit_card and bank_account among others). This seems fairly normalized to me, no? Now here is my problem: The payment transaction can take place for a myriad of reasons. Either a reservation is being paid for, a travel agent that booked a reservation is being paid, a driver is being paid, etc. This results in multiple tables, one for each of the entities: agent_tx, driver_tx, reservation_tx, etc. They look like this: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `driver_tx` ( `tx_id` int(10) unsigned zerofill NOT NULL, `driver_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `reservation_id` int(11) default NULL, `reservation_item_id` int(11) default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`tx_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; Now this transaction is for a driver, but could be applied to an individual item on the reservation or the entire reservation overall. Therefore I demand either reservation_id OR reservation_item_id to be null. In the future there may be other things which a driver is paid for, which I would also add to this table, defaulting to null. What is the rule on this? Opinion? Obviously I could break this out into MANY three column tables, but the amount of OUTER JOINing needed seems outrageous. Your input is appreciated. Peace, Tom

  Read the article

1