Search Results

Search found 33758 results on 1351 pages for 'primary key design'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 307/1351 | < Previous Page | 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314  | Next Page >

  • Recommendations for an in memory database vs thread safe data structures

    - by yx
    TLDR: What are the pros/cons of using an in-memory database vs locks and concurrent data structures? I am currently working on an application that has many (possibly remote) displays that collect live data from multiple data sources and renders them on screen in real time. One of the other developers have suggested the use of an in memory database instead of doing it the standard way our other systems behaves, which is to use concurrent hashmaps, queues, arrays, and other objects to store the graphical objects and handling them safely with locks if necessary. His argument is that the DB will lessen the need to worry about concurrency since it will handle read/write locks automatically, and also the DB will offer an easier way to structure the data into as many tables as we need instead of having create hashmaps of hashmaps of lists, etc and keeping track of it all. I do not have much DB experience myself so I am asking fellow SO users what experiences they have had and what are the pros & cons of inserting the DB into the system?

    Read the article

  • mysql and trigger usage question

    - by dhruvbird
    I have a situation in which I don't want inserts to take place (the transaction should rollback) if a certain condition is met. I could write this logic in the application code, but say for some reason, it has to be written in MySQL itself (say clients written in different languages will be inserting into this MySQL InnoDB table) [that's a separate discussion]. Table definition: CREATE TABLE table1(x int NOT NULL); The trigger looks something like this: CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 FOR EACH ROW IF (condition) THEN NEW.x = NULL; END IF; END; I am guessing it could also be written as(untested): CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 FOR EACH ROW IF (condition) THEN ROLLBACK; END IF; END; But, this doesn't work: CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 ROLLBACK; You are guaranteed that: Your DB will always be MySQL Table type will always be InnoDB That NOT NULL column will always stay the way it is Question: Do you see anything objectionable in the 1st method?

    Read the article

  • Is there an ORM that supports composition w/o Joins

    - by Ken Downs
    EDIT: Changed title from "inheritance" to "composition". Left body of question unchanged. I'm curious if there is an ORM tool that supports inheritance w/o creating separate tables that have to be joined. Simple example. Assume a table of customers, with a Bill-to address, and a table of vendors, with a remit-to address. Keep it simple and assume one address each, not a child table of addresses for each. These addresses will have a handful of values in common: address 1, address 2, city, state/province, postal code. So let's say I'd have a class "addressBlock" and I want the customers and vendors to inherit from this class, and possibly from other classes. But I do not want separate tables that have to be joined, I want the columns in the customer and vendor tables respectively. Is there an ORM that supports this? The closest question I have found on StackOverflow that might be the same question is linked below, but I can't quite figure if the OP is asking what I am asking. He seems to be asking about foregoing inheritance precisely because there will be multiple tables. I'm looking for the case where you can use inheritance w/o generating the multiple tables. Model inheritance approach with Django's ORM

    Read the article

  • Dealing with dependencies between WCF services when using Castle Windsor

    - by Georgia Brown
    I have several WCF services which use castle windsor to resolve their dependencies. Now I need some of these services to talk to each other. The typical structure is service -- Business Logic -- DAL The calls to the other services need to occur at Business Logic level. What is the best approach for implementing this? Should I simply inject a service proxy into the business logic? Is this wasteful if for example, only one of two method from my service need to use this proxy? What if the services need to talk to each other? - Will castle windsor get stuck in a loop trying to resolve each services dependencies?

    Read the article

  • Storing year/make/model in a database?

    - by Mark
    Here's what I'm thinking (excuse the Django format): class VehicleMake(Model): name = CharField(max_length=50) class VehicleModel(Model): make = ForeignKey(VehicleMake) name = CharField(max_length=50) class VehicleYear(Model): model = ForeignKey(VehicleModel) year = PositiveIntegerField() This is going to be used in those contingent drop-down select boxes, which would visually be laid out like [- Year -][- Make -][- Model -]. So, to query the data I need I would first have to select all distinct years from the years table, sorted descending. Then I'd find all the vehicle makes that have produced a model in that year. And then all the models by that make in that year. Is this a good way to do it, or should I re-arrange the foreign keys somehow? Or use a many-to-many table for the years/models so that no year is repeated?

    Read the article

  • Understanding MongoDB(and NoSQL in general) and How to make the best use of it

    - by Earlz
    Hello, I am beginning to think that my next project I am wanting to do would work better with a NoSQL solution. The project would either involve a ton of 2-column tables or a ton of dynamic queries with dynamically generated columns in a traditional SQL database. So I feel a NoSQL database would be much cleaner. I'm looking at MongoDB and it looks pretty promising. Anyway, I'm attempting to make sense of it all. Also, I will be using MongoMapper in Ruby. Anyway though, I'm confused as to how to layout things in such a freeform database. I've read http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2170152/nosql-best-practices and the answer there says that normalization is usually bad in a NoSQL DB. So how would be the best way of laying out say a simple blog with users, posts, and comments? My natural thought was to have 3 collections for each and then link them by a unique ID. But this apparently is wrong? So, what are some of the ways to lay out such a thing? My concern with the answer given in the other question is what if the author's name changed. You'd have to go through updating a ton of posts and comments. But is this an ok thing to do with NoSQL?

    Read the article

  • how can i use switch statement on type-safe enum pattern

    - by Fer
    I found a goodlooking example about implementation enums in a different way. That is called type-safe enum pattern i think. I started using it but i realized that i can not use it in a switch statement. My implementation looks like the following: public sealed class MyState { private readonly string m_Name; private readonly int m_Value; public static readonly MyState PASSED= new MyState(1, "OK"); public static readonly MyState FAILED= new MyState(2, "ERROR"); private MyState(int value, string name) { m_Name = name; m_Value = value; } public override string ToString() { return m_Name; } public int GetIntValue() { return m_Value; } } What can i add to my class in order to be able to use this pattern in switch statements in C#? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Tips on designing a .NET API for future use with F#

    - by Drew Noakes
    I'm in the process of designing a .NET API to allow developers to create RoboCup agents for the 3D simulated soccer league. I'm pretty happy with how the API work with C# code, however I would like to use this project to improve my F# skill (which is currently based on reading rather than practice). So I would like to ask what kinds of things I should consider when designing an API that is to be consumed by both C# and F# code. Some points. I make fairly heavy use of matrix and vector math. These are currently immutable classes/structs. The API currently defines a few interfaces with the consumer implements (eg: IAgent), using instances of their implementations (eg: MyAgent) to construct other API classes (eg: new Client(myAgent)). The API fires events. The API exposes a few delegate types. The API includes several enums. I'd like to release a version of the API as soon as possible and don't want to make major changes to it later if I realise it's too difficult to work with from F#. Any advice is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • PHP: Best solution for links breaking in a mod_rewrite app

    - by psil
    I'm using mod rewrite to redirect all requests targeting non-existent files/directories to index.php?url=* This is surely the most common thing you do with mod_rewrite yet I have a problem: Naturally, if the page url is "mydomain.com/blog/view/1", the browser will look for images, stylesheets and relative links in the "virtual" directory "mydomain.com/blog/view/". Problem 1: Is using the base tag the best solution? I see that none of the PHP frameworks out there use the base tag, though. I'm currently having a regex replace all the relative links to point to the right path before output. Is that "okay"? Problem 2: It is possible that the server doesn't support mod_rewrite. However, all public files like images, stylesheets and the requests collector index.php are located in the directory /myapp/public. Normally mod_rewrite points all request to /public so it seems as if public was actually the root directory too all users. However if there is no mod_rewrite, I then have to point the users to /public from the root directory with a header() call. That means, however that all links are broken again because suddenly all images, etc. have to be called via /public/myimage.jpg Additional info: When there is no mod_rewrite the above request would look like this: mydomain.com/public/index.php/blog/view/1 What would be the best solutions for both problems?

    Read the article

  • Creating combinations that have no more one intersecting element

    - by khuss
    I am looking to create a special type of combination in which no two sets have more than one intersecting element. Let me explain with an example: Let us say we have 9 letter set that contains A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I If you create the standard non-repeating combinations of three letters you will have 9C3 sets. These will contain sets like ABC, ABD, BCD, etc. I am looking to create sets that have at the most only 1 common letter. So in this example, we will get following sets: ABC, ADG, AEI, AFH, BEH, BFG, BDI, CFI, CDH, CEG, DEF, and GHI - note that if you take any two sets there are no more than 1 repeating letter. What would be a good way to generate such sets? It should be scalable solution so that I can do it for a set of 1000 letters, with sub set size of 4. Any help is highly appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why state cannot be part of Presenter in MVP?

    - by rFactor
    I read http://www.codeproject.com/KB/architecture/MVC_MVP_MVVM_design.aspx and it said: As powerful as they are, both MVC and MVP have their problems. One of them is persistence of the View’s state. For instance, if the Model, being a domain object, does not know anything about the UI, and the View does not implement any business logic, then where would we store the state of the View’s elements such as selected items? Fowler comes up with a solution in the form of a Presentation Model pattern. I wonder why Presenter can't hold View state? It already holds all View logic. As far as I understand, in MVC and MVP the state is kept in View. In PM and MVVM the state is kept in the Presentation Model. Why can't Presenter follow PM in this particular case and contain the state of the view? Here is another article which says Presenter does not hold View state, instead the view does: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/aspnet/ArchitectureComparison.aspx

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to store site configuration data?

    - by DaveDev
    I have a question about storing site configuration data. We have a platform for web applications. The idea is that different clients can have their data hosted and displayed on their own site which sits on top of this platform. Each site has a configuration which determines which panels relevant to the client appear on which pages. The system was originally designed to keep all the configuration data for each site in a database. When the site is loaded all the configuration data is loaded into a SiteConfiguration object, and the clients panels are generated based on the content of this object. This works, but I find it very difficult to work with to apply change requests or add new sites because there is so much data to sift through and it's difficult maintain a mental model of the site and its configuration. Recently I've been tasked with developing a subset of some of the sites to be generated as PDF documents for printing. I decided to take a different approach to how I would define the configuration in that instead of storing configuration data in the database, I wrote XML files to contain the data. I find it much easier to work with because instead of reading meaningless rows of data which are related to other meaningless rows of data, I have meaningful documents with semantic, readable information with the relationships defined by visually understandable element nesting. So now with these 2 approaches to storing site configuration data, I'd like to get the opinions of people more experienced in dealing with this issue on dealing with these two approaches. What is the best way of storing site configuration data? Is there a better way than the two ways I outlined here? note: StackOverflow is telling me the question appears to be subjective and is likely to be closed. I'm not trying to be subjective. I'd like to know how best to approach this issue next time and if people with industry experience on this could provide some input.

    Read the article

  • Domain model: should things like Logging, Audit, Persistence be in it

    - by hom.tanks
    I'm having a hard time convincing our architect that a Domain model should only have the essential elements of the business domain on it. Things like the fact that a class is persistable, that it needs logging and auditing and that it has a RESTful URI should not drive the domain model. They can be added later on, by using interfaces. Ours is a healthcare information management system. At the very coarse level, its a system where users login and access their healthcare information. They can share this information with others and be custodian for others' information (think Roles). But because of a few sound bytes that caught on early like "Everything should be a REST resource" the model now has a top level class called Resource that every other class extends from. I'm trying to make him see that the domain model should have well defined concepts like User Account, HealthDocument, UserRole etc which are distinct entities of the business , with specific associations between them. Clubbing everything under Resource class lets our model be inflexible besides being potentially incorrect. But he wants me to show him why its a bad idea to do it his way. I don't know how to articulate that properly but all my OO instincts tell me that its just not right. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • wrapping user controls in a transaction

    - by Hans Gruber
    I'm working on heavily dynamic and configurable CMS system. Therefore, many pages are composed of a dynamically loaded set of user controls. To enable loose coupling between containers (pages) and children (user controls), all user controls are responsible for their own persistence. Each User Control is wired up to its data/service layer dependencies via IoC. They also implement an IPersistable interface, which allows the container .aspx page to issue a Save command to its children without knowledge of the number or exact nature of these user controls. Note: what follows is only pseudo-code: public class MyUserControl : IPersistable, IValidatable { public void Save() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public bool IsValid() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public partial class MyPage { public void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { foreach (IValidatable control in Controls) { if (!control.IsValid) { throw new Exception("error"); } } foreach (IPersistable control in Controls) { if (!control.Save) { throw new Exception("error"); } } } } I'm thinking of using declarative transactions from the System.EnterpriseService namespace to wrap the btnSave_Click in a transaction in case of an exception, but I'm not sure how this might be achieved or any pitfalls to such an approach.

    Read the article

  • Accessing a Class Member from a First-Class Function

    - by dbyrne
    I have a case class which takes a list of functions: case class A(q:Double, r:Double, s:Double, l:List[(Double)=>Double]) I have over 20 functions defined. Some of these functions have their own parameters, and some of them also use the q, r, and s values from the case class. Two examples are: def f1(w:Double) = (d:Double) => math.sin(d) * w def f2(w:Double, q:Double) = (d:Double) => d * q * w The problem is that I then need to reference q, r, and s twice when instantiating the case class: A(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, List(f1(3.0), f2(4.0, 0.5))) //0.5 is referenced twice I would like to be able to instantiate the class like this: A(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, List(f1(3.0), f2(4.0))) //f2 already knows about q! What is the best technique to accomplish this? Can I define my functions in a trait that the case class extends? EDIT: The real world application has 7 members, not 3. Only a small number of the functions need access to the members. Most of the functions don't care about them.

    Read the article

  • Languages and VMs: Features that are hard to optimize and why

    - by mrjoltcola
    I'm doing a survey of features in preparation for a research project. Name a mainstream language or language feature that is hard to optimize, and why the feature is or isn't worth the price paid, or instead, just debunk my theories below with anecdotal evidence. Before anyone flags this as subjective, I am asking for specific examples of languages or features, and ideas for optimization of these features, or important features that I haven't considered. Also, any references to implementations that prove my theories right or wrong. Top on my list of hard to optimize features and my theories (some of my theories are untested and are based on thought experiments): 1) Runtime method overloading (aka multi-method dispatch or signature based dispatch). Is it hard to optimize when combined with features that allow runtime recompilation or method addition. Or is it just hard, anyway? Call site caching is a common optimization for many runtime systems, but multi-methods add additional complexity as well as making it less practical to inline methods. 2) Type morphing / variants (aka value based typing as opposed to variable based) Traditional optimizations simply cannot be applied when you don't know if the type of someting can change in a basic block. Combined with multi-methods, inlining must be done carefully if at all, and probably only for a given threshold of size of the callee. ie. it is easy to consider inlining simple property fetches (getters / setters) but inlining complex methods may result in code bloat. The other issue is I cannot just assign a variant to a register and JIT it to the native instructions because I have to carry around the type info, or every variable needs 2 registers instead of 1. On IA-32 this is inconvenient, even if improved with x64's extra registers. This is probably my favorite feature of dynamic languages, as it simplifies so many things from the programmer's perspective. 3) First class continuations - There are multiple ways to implement them, and I have done so in both of the most common approaches, one being stack copying and the other as implementing the runtime to use continuation passing style, cactus stacks, copy-on-write stack frames, and garbage collection. First class continuations have resource management issues, ie. we must save everything, in case the continuation is resumed, and I'm not aware if any languages support leaving a continuation with "intent" (ie. "I am not coming back here, so you may discard this copy of the world"). Having programmed in the threading model and the contination model, I know both can accomplish the same thing, but continuations' elegance imposes considerable complexity on the runtime and also may affect cache efficienty (locality of stack changes more with use of continuations and co-routines). The other issue is they just don't map to hardware. Optimizing continuations is optimizing for the less-common case, and as we know, the common case should be fast, and the less-common cases should be correct. 4) Pointer arithmetic and ability to mask pointers (storing in integers, etc.) Had to throw this in, but I could actually live without this quite easily. My feelings are that many of the high-level features, particularly in dynamic languages just don't map to hardware. Microprocessor implementations have billions of dollars of research behind the optimizations on the chip, yet the choice of language feature(s) may marginalize many of these features (features like caching, aliasing top of stack to register, instruction parallelism, return address buffers, loop buffers and branch prediction). Macro-applications of micro-features don't necessarily pan out like some developers like to think, and implementing many languages in a VM ends up mapping native ops into function calls (ie. the more dynamic a language is the more we must lookup/cache at runtime, nothing can be assumed, so our instruction mix is made up of a higher percentage of non-local branching than traditional, statically compiled code) and the only thing we can really JIT well is expression evaluation of non-dynamic types and operations on constant or immediate types. It is my gut feeling that bytecode virtual machines and JIT cores are perhaps not always justified for certain languages because of this. I welcome your answers.

    Read the article

  • Binary Search Tree for specific intent

    - by Luís Guilherme
    We all know there are plenty of self-balancing binary search trees (BST), being the most famous the Red-Black and the AVL. It might be useful to take a look at AA-trees and scapegoat trees too. I want to do deletions insertions and searches, like any other BST. However, it will be common to delete all values in a given range, or deleting whole subtrees. So: I want to insert, search, remove values in O(log n) (balanced tree). I would like to delete a subtree, keeping the whole tree balanced, in O(log n) (worst-case or amortized) It might be useful to delete several values in a row, before balancing the tree I will most often insert 2 values at once, however this is not a rule (just a tip in case there is a tree data structure that takes this into account) Is there a variant of AVL or RB that helps me on this? Scapegoat-trees look more like this, but would also need some changes, anyone who has got experience on them can share some thougts? More precisely, which balancing procedure and/or removal procedure would help me keep this actions time-efficient?

    Read the article

  • CSS box around box technique

    - by webzide
    Dear Experts, I was trying to make an CSS division box with content in it as well as a border around it. Instead of using the box-border technique, I was trying out a new box to box technique instead. <html> <head> <style type="text/css"> #outer{ height: 20px; width: 20px; background-color:#233D78; } #inner{ height:18px; width: 18px; background-color: #FFF; font-size: 1em; text-align:center; font-family:'Bookman Old Style', serif; padding: 0px; margin-top: 1px; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; margin-bottom:1px; vertical-align:middle; } </style> </head> <body> <div id="outer"><div id="inner">TEXT</div></div> </body> </html> Somehow the borders are just not showing up right with FireFox. I tried everything. Setting up the Paddings of both boxes, margin, and messing around with the width. TO be honest, it took me around 30min to do this and I still can't get it right :( I know that a way to achieve the same result would be setting up a border around just one box. But I just wanna learn this box around box background-color technique. THanks in advance

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314  | Next Page >