Search Results

Search found 8673 results on 347 pages for 'kvm switch'.

Page 16/347 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • Maxivista vs. Synergy vs. hardware KVM switches [closed]

    - by GetFree
    I have 2 PCs on my desk, each one with its own screen, mouse and keyboard. And it's a pain moving from one PC to the other (even though they are one foot away from each other). So, it's time to change to different approach: KVM switches. What would you recommend for a setup like mine? I dont need to change monitors since they are both in front of me. I just need a way to change mouse and keyboard. I use Windows on both PCs and money is not an issue if it worth it. What would be the best option for a seamless integration of the two PCs? Edit: What about other software similar to Synergy, like Input Director? What's more convenient in your experience?

    Read the article

  • replace a bunch of show/hide with switch/case in javascript

    - by Adam
    Page has menu items that would replace a 'div id=foo_(current menu item)' with 'div id=foo_(selected menu item)' in 'div class=foo' Here's what I've got, and try to keep your breakfast down... $('#t1').click(function() { $('#attorney').show(); $('#insurance,#financial,#estate,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t2').click(function() { $('#insurance').show(); $('#attorney,#financial,#estate,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t3').click(function() { $('#financial').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#estate,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t4').click(function() { $('#estate').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#financial,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t5').click(function() { $('#trust').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#financial,#estate,#death').hide(); }); $('#t6').click(function() { $('#death').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#financial,#estate,#trust').hide(); });

    Read the article

  • replace a buch of show/hide with switch/case in javascript

    - by Adam
    Page has menu items that would replace a 'div id=foo_(current menu item)' with 'div id=foo_(selected menu item)' in 'div class=foo' Here's what I've got, and try to keep your breakfast down... $('#t1').click(function() { $('#attorney').show(); $('#insurance,#financial,#estate,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t2').click(function() { $('#insurance').show(); $('#attorney,#financial,#estate,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t3').click(function() { $('#financial').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#estate,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t4').click(function() { $('#estate').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#financial,#trust,#death').hide(); }); $('#t5').click(function() { $('#trust').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#financial,#estate,#death').hide(); }); $('#t6').click(function() { $('#death').show(); $('#attorney,#insurance,#financial,#estate,#trust').hide(); });

    Read the article

  • Does the order of case in Switch statement can vary the performance?

    - by Bipul
    Let say I have a switch statement as below Switch(alphabet){ case "f": //do something break; case "c": //do something break; case "a": //do something break; case "e": //do something break; } Now suppose I know that the frequency of having Alphabet e is highest followed by a, c and f respectively. So, I just restructured the case statement order and made them as follows. Switch(alphabet){ case "e": //do something break; case "a": //do something break; case "c": //do something break; case "f": //do something break; } Will the second Switch statement better perform(means faster) than the first switch statement? If yes and if in my program I need to call this switch statement say many times, will that be a substantial improvement? Or if not in any how can I use my frequency knowledge to improve the performance? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Switch front-end's of a website after X amount of hits

    - by Derek Adair
    Sorry about the title - not sure what to call this one. A client of mine would like to redirect users to different front-ends of his eCommerce site based on a hit-counter (possibly a timer?). important: -The content is moderately different in the two sites, enough to consider them two different websites. Knowing this client he will likely add more drastic content changes and other front-ends. So for this question consider the content to be -This site has a rather large back-end. With affiliate networking, multiple payment gateways, order-tracking, and several other features in the works. It is essential that these two front-ends have identical back-end functionality I know that if it was just a simple CSS swap this would be as simple as an if statement that ran off some kind of counter stored in a DB... but the different HTML markup is throwing me for a loop. Q: How can I serve two different front-ends (HTML/CSS) based on a hit counter? Also, I don't have any clue what to tag this one as...

    Read the article

  • Switch User in RedHat like XP [closed]

    - by rd42
    In our cluster, RedHat4 & 5 machines, if someone locks the computer and walks away no body can use it. Is there a feature in RedHat5, Gnome, KDE etc that would allow for the option of switching users at the lock screen, so more than one person can be logged in? Thanks, rd42

    Read the article

  • KVM and libvirt: How to configure a new disc device to an existing VM?

    - by initall
    I've got an Ubuntu 9.04 server running two VM's. In /etc/libvirt/qemu/machine1.xml two disk devices are defined like this: <devices> <emulator>/usr/bin/kvm</emulator> <disk type='file' device='disk'> <source file='/vserver/machine1/disk0.qcow2'/> <target dev='hda' bus='ide'/> </disk> <disk type='file' device='disk'> <source file='/vserver/machine1/disk1.qcow2'/> <target dev='hdb' bus='ide'/> </disk> I need more storage space in at least one of the devices and thought about adding a third hdc device by simply adding one with same style as above and re-organising my mount structure (The virtual sizes of the current qcow2 files are unfortunately limited.) My problem is that reloading libvirtd and restarting the VM do not result in a new visible device (checked with fdisk). I'm aware of extending an existing qcow2 file (converting to raw format, cat-ing/adding the new one, using smth. like gparted) - but only as a last resort. Hopefully it's something very simple I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Do Managed/Unmanaged Switch Really need to have their Cabinets/Racks?

    - by Googooboyy
    Hi guys, I'm new to managed switches and I recently inquired an IT consultant to setup my new office network. For the records, the new office network spans 2 floors, thus he recommended utilising ONE managed switch with a rack/cabinet housing, and the rest using unmanaged switches. Anyways, my main question is: does a managed switch really need to be housed on a rack, or in its own cabinet, to function efficiently? Btw, what are the pros/cons of having a rack/cabinet?

    Read the article

  • What to look for in a switch with LAN/WAN verses an iSCSI SAN?

    - by Luke
    I'm setting up a VMWare ESXi 5 environment with 3 server nodes. Dell recommended 2x Force10 S60 switches shared (iSCSI SAN, LAN/WAN). The S60 switches are extremely powerful. They have 1.25 GB of buffer cache, < 9us latency. But they are very expensive (online price ~$15k per switch, actual quote a little less). I've been told that "by the book" you should at least have 2 internal switches for SAN, and 2 switches for LAN/WAN (each with a redundant). I know some of the pros and cons of each approach. What I'm wondering is, would it be more cost effective to disjoin the SAN from LAN with less expensive switches? The answer to this question highlights what I should be looking for in a switch for the SAN. What should I be looking for in a LAN/WAN switch, in comparison to the SAN? With the above linked question for the SAN: How is buffer latency measured? When you see 36 MB of buffer cache, is that shared or per port? So 36 MB would be 768kb or 36MB per port? With 3 to 6 servers how much buffer cache do you really need? What else should I be looking at? Our application will be heavily using HTML5 websockets (high number of persistent connections). The amount of data being sent is small; Data sent between client <- server isn't broadcasted (not a chat/IM service). We will be doing some database reporting too (csv export, sums, some joins). We are a small business and on a budget. We'd probably only be able to spend no more than $20k on switches total (2 or 4).

    Read the article

  • How do I connect to and factory reset a Catalyst 3560 Switch?

    - by Josh
    My company just bought another company. In their server room they had some older hardware, which I would like to repurpose. One of these is a Cisco Switch: C3560G-48TS-S. I found some instructions about this switch here but this is not a guide for a beginner. I have no idea how to connect to this thing to begin running the commands. It says Configure the PC terminal emulation software for 9600 baud, 8 data bits, no parity, 1 stop bit, and no flow control. But I can't find anything on how to do this (assuming with telnet?) or even what program to use. I also don't know how to find the IP address of the device to connect to it. My research also says once I get in there, I need to run clear config all Is this the right command? Also, what if I can't get the username and password for these devices? Is there some way to factory reset (my only experience is with devices that have a hardware reset button) EDIT: I should note that when I push the button on the front the three lights blink, which according to the documentation indicated the switch is configured and "not available for express setup"

    Read the article

  • Run script after switching user account "to the same account"

    - by Peter Sivák
    In Ubuntu, when I click on Switch User Account... and then choose the same account to log in (for example if my name is John Smith, I click on switch user account and then log into the John Smith account again), how can I run a script after that? (I know, that I can run a script after "first" login by putting it in /etc/profile file, but this script is not executed again when I choose switch user account and then immediately log in back to the same account.)

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 in KVM

    - by Joseph
    I've been working on getting a Windows Server 2008 KVM in my linux box running Ubuntu Server 12.04. I've got virt-install and virt-manager installed, got the install up and running via virt-install --connect qemu:///system -n winsvr2008 -r 1024 --vcpus=1 --disk path=/home/pwnd/vm/2008.img,size=30 -c /home/pwnd/en_windows_server_2008_with_sp2_x86_dvd_342333.iso --graphics vnc,listen=192.168.1.127 --noautoconsole --os-type=windows --os-variant=win2k8 --network=bridge:virbr0 --hvm -v and virsh vncdisplay winsvr2008 I can connect and view, but upon starting, I get hung up on please wait right after clicking Install. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server database with clustered GUID PKs - switch clustered index or switch to sequential (comb)

    - by Eyvind
    We have a database in which all the PKs are GUIDs, and most of the PKs are also the clustered index for the table. We know that this is bad (due to the random nature of GUIDs). So, it seems there are basically two options here (short of throwing out GUIDs as PKs altogether, which we cannot do (at least not at this time)). We could change the GUID generation algorithm to e.g. the one that NHibernate uses, as detailed in this post, or we could, for the tables that are under the heaviest use, change to a different clustered index, e.g. an IDENTITY column, and keep the "random" GUIDs as PKs. Is it possible to give any general recommendations in such a scenario? The application in question has 500+ tables, the largest one presently at about 1,5 million rows, a few tables around 500 000 rows, and the rest significantly lower (most of them well below 10K). Furthermore, the application is installed at several customer sites already, so we have to take any possible negative effects for existing customer into consideration. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • MS SQL Database with clustered GUID PKs - switch clustered index or switch to sequential (comb) GUID

    - by Eyvind
    We have a database in which all the PKs are GUIDs, and most of the PKs are also the clustered index for the table. We know that this is bad (due to the random nature of GUIDs). So, it seems there are basically two options here (short of throwing out GUIDs as PKs altogether, which we cannot do (at least not at this time)). We could change the GUID generation algorithm to e.g. the one that NHibernate uses, as detailed in this post, or we could, for the tables that are under the heaviest use, change to a different clustered index, e.g. an IDENTITY column, and keep the "random" GUIDs as PKs. Is it possible to give any general recommendations in such a scenario? The application in question has 500+ tables, the largest one presently at about 1,5 million rows, a few tables around 500 000 rows, and the rest significantly lower (most of them well below 10K). Furthermore, the application is installed at several customer sites already, so we have to take any possible negative effects for existing customer into consideration. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Does an unmanaged 4/8-port GBit Ethernet switch with a GBIC port exist?

    - by Aaron Digulla
    I'm looking for a simple unmanaged switch with 4-8 GBit Ethernet ports and a fiber port (either as a GBIC slot or pre-installed with a 1000BASE-SX port). Does something like that exist? [EDIT] I want to connect to places in my home without drilling large holes though the floors. Therefore, I'm looking for a cheap way to connect two GBit switches via fiber. I tried with a media converter (GBit <- multimode fiber) but that costs about 50% throughput. So I was hoping that there is a cheap, small GBit switch which has a GBIC slot). All I found so far are very expensive managed switches with 12 or 24 ports for industry use.

    Read the article

  • How to switch off the monitor when mouse reaches the edge of the screen?

    - by evgeny9
    I have 2 computers at home (Windows XP and Windows 7), but one monitor for both of them. They are connected to this monitor using different interfaces: DVI and VGA. I'm also using one keyboard and one mouse to control both PCs with the help of Synergy or Input Director. But I still need to manually switch between monitor interfaces. I wonder, if there's some way (software) that will switch this interfaces (turn off the monitor), when reach the edge of the screen with the mouse. Until now I found several answers, which help to avoid pressing hardware buttons, but still can not do the job automatically based on mouse pointer coordinates. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Hello Operator, My Switch Is Bored

    - by Paul White
    This is a post for T-SQL Tuesday #43 hosted by my good friend Rob Farley. The topic this month is Plan Operators. I haven’t taken part in T-SQL Tuesday before, but I do like to write about execution plans, so this seemed like a good time to start. This post is in two parts. The first part is primarily an excuse to use a pretty bad play on words in the title of this blog post (if you’re too young to know what a telephone operator or a switchboard is, I hate you). The second part of the post looks at an invisible query plan operator (so to speak). 1. My Switch Is Bored Allow me to present the rare and interesting execution plan operator, Switch: Books Online has this to say about Switch: Following that description, I had a go at producing a Fast Forward Cursor plan that used the TOP operator, but had no luck. That may be due to my lack of skill with cursors, I’m not too sure. The only application of Switch in SQL Server 2012 that I am familiar with requires a local partitioned view: CREATE TABLE dbo.T1 (c1 int NOT NULL CHECK (c1 BETWEEN 00 AND 24)); CREATE TABLE dbo.T2 (c1 int NOT NULL CHECK (c1 BETWEEN 25 AND 49)); CREATE TABLE dbo.T3 (c1 int NOT NULL CHECK (c1 BETWEEN 50 AND 74)); CREATE TABLE dbo.T4 (c1 int NOT NULL CHECK (c1 BETWEEN 75 AND 99)); GO CREATE VIEW V1 AS SELECT c1 FROM dbo.T1 UNION ALL SELECT c1 FROM dbo.T2 UNION ALL SELECT c1 FROM dbo.T3 UNION ALL SELECT c1 FROM dbo.T4; Not only that, but it needs an updatable local partitioned view. We’ll need some primary keys to meet that requirement: ALTER TABLE dbo.T1 ADD CONSTRAINT PK_T1 PRIMARY KEY (c1);   ALTER TABLE dbo.T2 ADD CONSTRAINT PK_T2 PRIMARY KEY (c1);   ALTER TABLE dbo.T3 ADD CONSTRAINT PK_T3 PRIMARY KEY (c1);   ALTER TABLE dbo.T4 ADD CONSTRAINT PK_T4 PRIMARY KEY (c1); We also need an INSERT statement that references the view. Even more specifically, to see a Switch operator, we need to perform a single-row insert (multi-row inserts use a different plan shape): INSERT dbo.V1 (c1) VALUES (1); And now…the execution plan: The Constant Scan manufactures a single row with no columns. The Compute Scalar works out which partition of the view the new value should go in. The Assert checks that the computed partition number is not null (if it is, an error is returned). The Nested Loops Join executes exactly once, with the partition id as an outer reference (correlated parameter). The Switch operator checks the value of the parameter and executes the corresponding input only. If the partition id is 0, the uppermost Clustered Index Insert is executed, adding a row to table T1. If the partition id is 1, the next lower Clustered Index Insert is executed, adding a row to table T2…and so on. In case you were wondering, here’s a query and execution plan for a multi-row insert to the view: INSERT dbo.V1 (c1) VALUES (1), (2); Yuck! An Eager Table Spool and four Filters! I prefer the Switch plan. My guess is that almost all the old strategies that used a Switch operator have been replaced over time, using things like a regular Concatenation Union All combined with Start-Up Filters on its inputs. Other new (relative to the Switch operator) features like table partitioning have specific execution plan support that doesn’t need the Switch operator either. This feels like a bit of a shame, but perhaps it is just nostalgia on my part, it’s hard to know. Please do let me know if you encounter a query that can still use the Switch operator in 2012 – it must be very bored if this is the only possible modern usage! 2. Invisible Plan Operators The second part of this post uses an example based on a question Dave Ballantyne asked using the SQL Sentry Plan Explorer plan upload facility. If you haven’t tried that yet, make sure you’re on the latest version of the (free) Plan Explorer software, and then click the Post to SQLPerformance.com button. That will create a site question with the query plan attached (which can be anonymized if the plan contains sensitive information). Aaron Bertrand and I keep a close eye on questions there, so if you have ever wanted to ask a query plan question of either of us, that’s a good way to do it. The problem The issue I want to talk about revolves around a query issued against a calendar table. The script below creates a simplified version and adds 100 years of per-day information to it: USE tempdb; GO CREATE TABLE dbo.Calendar ( dt date NOT NULL, isWeekday bit NOT NULL, theYear smallint NOT NULL,   CONSTRAINT PK__dbo_Calendar_dt PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED (dt) ); GO -- Monday is the first day of the week for me SET DATEFIRST 1;   -- Add 100 years of data INSERT dbo.Calendar WITH (TABLOCKX) (dt, isWeekday, theYear) SELECT CA.dt, isWeekday = CASE WHEN DATEPART(WEEKDAY, CA.dt) IN (6, 7) THEN 0 ELSE 1 END, theYear = YEAR(CA.dt) FROM Sandpit.dbo.Numbers AS N CROSS APPLY ( VALUES (DATEADD(DAY, N.n - 1, CONVERT(date, '01 Jan 2000', 113))) ) AS CA (dt) WHERE N.n BETWEEN 1 AND 36525; The following query counts the number of weekend days in 2013: SELECT Days = COUNT_BIG(*) FROM dbo.Calendar AS C WHERE theYear = 2013 AND isWeekday = 0; It returns the correct result (104) using the following execution plan: The query optimizer has managed to estimate the number of rows returned from the table exactly, based purely on the default statistics created separately on the two columns referenced in the query’s WHERE clause. (Well, almost exactly, the unrounded estimate is 104.289 rows.) There is already an invisible operator in this query plan – a Filter operator used to apply the WHERE clause predicates. We can see it by re-running the query with the enormously useful (but undocumented) trace flag 9130 enabled: Now we can see the full picture. The whole table is scanned, returning all 36,525 rows, before the Filter narrows that down to just the 104 we want. Without the trace flag, the Filter is incorporated in the Clustered Index Scan as a residual predicate. It is a little bit more efficient than using a separate operator, but residual predicates are still something you will want to avoid where possible. The estimates are still spot on though: Anyway, looking to improve the performance of this query, Dave added the following filtered index to the Calendar table: CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX Weekends ON dbo.Calendar(theYear) WHERE isWeekday = 0; The original query now produces a much more efficient plan: Unfortunately, the estimated number of rows produced by the seek is now wrong (365 instead of 104): What’s going on? The estimate was spot on before we added the index! Explanation You might want to grab a coffee for this bit. Using another trace flag or two (8606 and 8612) we can see that the cardinality estimates were exactly right initially: The highlighted information shows the initial cardinality estimates for the base table (36,525 rows), the result of applying the two relational selects in our WHERE clause (104 rows), and after performing the COUNT_BIG(*) group by aggregate (1 row). All of these are correct, but that was before cost-based optimization got involved :) Cost-based optimization When cost-based optimization starts up, the logical tree above is copied into a structure (the ‘memo’) that has one group per logical operation (roughly speaking). The logical read of the base table (LogOp_Get) ends up in group 7; the two predicates (LogOp_Select) end up in group 8 (with the details of the selections in subgroups 0-6). These two groups still have the correct cardinalities as trace flag 8608 output (initial memo contents) shows: During cost-based optimization, a rule called SelToIdxStrategy runs on group 8. It’s job is to match logical selections to indexable expressions (SARGs). It successfully matches the selections (theYear = 2013, is Weekday = 0) to the filtered index, and writes a new alternative into the memo structure. The new alternative is entered into group 8 as option 1 (option 0 was the original LogOp_Select): The new alternative is to do nothing (PhyOp_NOP = no operation), but to instead follow the new logical instructions listed below the NOP. The LogOp_GetIdx (full read of an index) goes into group 21, and the LogOp_SelectIdx (selection on an index) is placed in group 22, operating on the result of group 21. The definition of the comparison ‘the Year = 2013’ (ScaOp_Comp downwards) was already present in the memo starting at group 2, so no new memo groups are created for that. New Cardinality Estimates The new memo groups require two new cardinality estimates to be derived. First, LogOp_Idx (full read of the index) gets a predicted cardinality of 10,436. This number comes from the filtered index statistics: DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS (Calendar, Weekends) WITH STAT_HEADER; The second new cardinality derivation is for the LogOp_SelectIdx applying the predicate (theYear = 2013). To get a number for this, the cardinality estimator uses statistics for the column ‘theYear’, producing an estimate of 365 rows (there are 365 days in 2013!): DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS (Calendar, theYear) WITH HISTOGRAM; This is where the mistake happens. Cardinality estimation should have used the filtered index statistics here, to get an estimate of 104 rows: DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS (Calendar, Weekends) WITH HISTOGRAM; Unfortunately, the logic has lost sight of the link between the read of the filtered index (LogOp_GetIdx) in group 22, and the selection on that index (LogOp_SelectIdx) that it is deriving a cardinality estimate for, in group 21. The correct cardinality estimate (104 rows) is still present in the memo, attached to group 8, but that group now has a PhyOp_NOP implementation. Skipping over the rest of cost-based optimization (in a belated attempt at brevity) we can see the optimizer’s final output using trace flag 8607: This output shows the (incorrect, but understandable) 365 row estimate for the index range operation, and the correct 104 estimate still attached to its PhyOp_NOP. This tree still has to go through a few post-optimizer rewrites and ‘copy out’ from the memo structure into a tree suitable for the execution engine. One step in this process removes PhyOp_NOP, discarding its 104-row cardinality estimate as it does so. To finish this section on a more positive note, consider what happens if we add an OVER clause to the query aggregate. This isn’t intended to be a ‘fix’ of any sort, I just want to show you that the 104 estimate can survive and be used if later cardinality estimation needs it: SELECT Days = COUNT_BIG(*) OVER () FROM dbo.Calendar AS C WHERE theYear = 2013 AND isWeekday = 0; The estimated execution plan is: Note the 365 estimate at the Index Seek, but the 104 lives again at the Segment! We can imagine the lost predicate ‘isWeekday = 0’ as sitting between the seek and the segment in an invisible Filter operator that drops the estimate from 365 to 104. Even though the NOP group is removed after optimization (so we don’t see it in the execution plan) bear in mind that all cost-based choices were made with the 104-row memo group present, so although things look a bit odd, it shouldn’t affect the optimizer’s plan selection. I should also mention that we can work around the estimation issue by including the index’s filtering columns in the index key: CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX Weekends ON dbo.Calendar(theYear, isWeekday) WHERE isWeekday = 0 WITH (DROP_EXISTING = ON); There are some downsides to doing this, including that changes to the isWeekday column may now require Halloween Protection, but that is unlikely to be a big problem for a static calendar table ;)  With the updated index in place, the original query produces an execution plan with the correct cardinality estimation showing at the Index Seek: That’s all for today, remember to let me know about any Switch plans you come across on a modern instance of SQL Server! Finally, here are some other posts of mine that cover other plan operators: Segment and Sequence Project Common Subexpression Spools Why Plan Operators Run Backwards Row Goals and the Top Operator Hash Match Flow Distinct Top N Sort Index Spools and Page Splits Singleton and Range Seeks Bitmaps Hash Join Performance Compute Scalar © 2013 Paul White – All Rights Reserved Twitter: @SQL_Kiwi

    Read the article

  • Advantages to Multiple Methods over Switch

    - by tandu
    I received a code review from a senior developer today asking "By the way, what is your objection to dispatching functions by way of a switch statement?" I have read in many places about how pumping an argument through switch to call methods is bad OOP, not as extensible, etc. However, I can't really come up with a definitive answer for him. I would like to settle this for myself once and for all. Here are our competing code suggestions (php used as an example, but can apply more universally): class Switch { public function go($arg) { switch ($arg) { case "one": echo "one\n"; break; case "two": echo "two\n"; break; case "three": echo "three\n"; break; default: throw new Exception("Unknown call: $arg"); break; } } } class Oop { public function go_one() { echo "one\n"; } public function go_two() { echo "two\n"; } public function go_three() { echo "three\n"; } public function __call($_, $__) { throw new Exception("Unknown call $_ with arguments: " . print_r($__, true)); } } Part of his argument was "It (switch method) has a much cleaner way of handling default cases than what you have in the generic __call() magic method." I disagree about the cleanliness and in fact prefer call, but I would like to hear what others have to say. Arguments I can come up with in support of Oop scheme: A bit cleaner in terms of the code you have to write (less, easier to read, less keywords to consider) Not all actions delegated to a single method. Not much difference in execution here, but at least the text is more compartmentalized. In the same vein, another method can be added anywhere in the class instead of a specific spot. Methods are namespaced, which is nice. Does not apply here, but consider a case where Switch::go() operated on a member rather than a parameter. You would have to change the member first, then call the method. For Oop you can call the methods independently at any time. Arguments I can come up with in support of Switch scheme: For the sake of argument, cleaner method of dealing with a default (unknown) request Seems less magical, which might make unfamiliar developers feel more comfortable Anyone have anything to add for either side? I'd like to have a good answer for him.

    Read the article

  • How to make a big switch control structure with variable check values?

    - by mystify
    For example, I have a huge switch control structure with a few hundred checks. They're an animation sequence, which is numbered from 0 to n. Someone said I can't use variables with switch. What I need is something like: NSInteger step = 0; NSInteger i = 0; switch (step) { case i++: // do stuff break; case i++: // do stuff break; case i++: // do stuff break; case i++: // do stuff break; } The point of this is, that the animation system calls a method with this big switch structure, giving it a step number. I want to be able to simply cut-copy-paste large blocks and put them in a different position inside the switch. for example, the first 50 blocks to the end. I could do that easily with a huge if-else structure, but it would look ugly and something tells me switch is much faster. How to?

    Read the article

  • What causes a switch port to receive data not destined for it?

    - by user1693454
    We are having an intermittent fault which is effecting one of our control systems on one of our HP Procurve switches. For some reason, this PLC (10mbit port - 192.168.6.56) which is attached directly to the HP Switch intermittantly start's receiving data which is not destined for it. The data is being sent from a Thecus NAS with latest firmware (192.168.6.218) to a physical IBM Server running Win2003R2 and SAP (192.168.6.225). The problem does not just send to this server, it has been to other physical servers in the past too, but always from the Thecus NAS. I am using a monitor port to wireshark what is going in/out of the PLC - normally there would be about 1mb in/out per 2 or 3 minutes - only a server asking the state of the coils. When the problem occurs, there is a flood of data being put onto the PLC line - in this captured instance, about 67mb in less than a minute. Due to this, there is no way that the PLC can be queried as the port is effectively DOSed, in turn killing part of our factory. I know that having Production on the same vlan as IT is not a good idea - I agree, however it cannot be changed at the moment (will have to wait 3 months), as well as the problem has only started happening in the last 3 months. Here is a screen cap of one of the packets being sent from the Thecus NAS which was captured from the PLC port on the HP Switch: And there are over 700 of these in this one 1024kb file. If anyone has any idea on what could be going on, some help would be greatly appreciated. If you need to know anything more, let me know! Cheers!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >