Search Results

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

Page 4/399 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • What would one call this architecture?

    - by Chris
    I have developed a distributed test automation system which consists of two different entities. One entity is responsible for triggering tests runs and monitoring/displaying their progress. The other is responsible for carrying out tests on that host. Both of these entities retrieve data from a central DB. Now, my first thought is that this is clearly a server-client architecture. After all, you have exactly one organizing entity and many entities that communicate with said entity. However, while the supposed clients to communicate to the server via RPC, they are not actually requesting services or information, rather they are simply reporting back test progress, in fact, once the test run has been triggered they can complete their tasks without connection to the server. The request for a service is actually made by the supposed server which triggers the clients to carry out tests. So would this still be considered a server-client architecture or is this something different?

    Read the article

  • Entity framework architecture

    - by user1741807
    I want to make a entity framework application in Winforms C#. I'm new to entity framework, and don't know how to make the architecture. I want to have the model in a class library, and a GUI layer, and maybe a controller layer. I'm used to that architecture, but don't know have to handle the objects in other layers than the model. Have do I manage objects in the gui layer, when I can't have a reference to the model? I'm used to have some kind of dto, but what's the best way?

    Read the article

  • Enterprise Process Maps: A Process Picture worth a Million Words

    - by raul.goycoolea
    p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }h1 { margin-top: 0.33in; margin-bottom: 0in; color: rgb(54, 95, 145); page-break-inside: avoid; }h1.western { font-family: "Cambria",serif; font-size: 14pt; }h1.cjk { font-family: "DejaVu Sans"; font-size: 14pt; }h1.ctl { font-size: 14pt; } Getting Started with Business Transformations A well-known proverb states that "A picture is worth a thousand words." In relation to Business Process Management (BPM), a credible analyst might have a few questions. What if the picture was taken from some particular angle, like directly overhead? What if it was taken from only an inch away or a mile away? What if the photographer did not focus the camera correctly? Does the value of the picture depend on who is looking at it? Enterprise Process Maps are analogous in this sense of relative value. Every BPM project (holistic BPM kick-off, enterprise system implementation, Service-oriented Architecture, business process transformation, corporate performance management, etc.) should be begin with a clear understanding of the business environment, from the biggest picture representations down to the lowest level required or desired for the particular project type, scope and objectives. The Enterprise Process Map serves as an entry point for the process architecture and is defined: the single highest level of process mapping for an organization. It is constructed and evaluated during the Strategy Phase of the Business Process Management Lifecycle. (see Figure 1) Fig. 1: Business Process Management Lifecycle Many organizations view such maps as visual abstractions, constructed for the single purpose of process categorization. This, in turn, results in a lesser focus on the inherent intricacies of the Enterprise Process view, which are explored in the course of this paper. With the main focus of a large scale process documentation effort usually underlying an ERP or other system implementation, it is common for the work to be driven by the desire to "get to the details," and to the type of modeling that will derive near-term tangible results. For instance, a project in American Pharmaceutical Company X is driven by the Director of IT. With 120+ systems in place, and a lack of standardized processes across the United States, he and the VP of IT have decided to embark on a long-term ERP implementation. At the forethought of both are questions, such as: How does my application architecture map to the business? What are each application's functionalities, and where do the business processes utilize them? Where can we retire legacy systems? Well-developed BPM methodologies prescribe numerous model types to capture such information and allow for thorough analysis in these areas. Process to application maps, Event Driven Process Chains, etc. provide this level of detail and facilitate the completion of such project-specific questions. These models and such analysis are appropriately carried out at a relatively low level of process detail. (see figure 2) Fig. 2: The Level Concept, Generic Process HierarchySome of the questions remaining are ones of documentation longevity, the continuation of BPM practice in the organization, process governance and ownership, process transparency and clarity in business process objectives and strategy. The Level Concept in Brief Figure 2 shows a generic, four-level process hierarchy depicting the breakdown of a "Process Area" into progressively more detailed process classifications. The number of levels and the names of these levels are flexible, and can be fit to the standards of the organization's chosen terminology or any other chosen reference model that makes logical sense for both short and long term process description. It is at Level 1 (in this case the Process Area level), that the Enterprise Process Map is created. This map and its contained objects become the foundation for a top-down approach to subsequent mapping, object relationship development, and analysis of the organization's processes and its supporting infrastructure. Additionally, this picture serves as a communication device, at an executive level, describing the design of the business in its service to a customer. It seems, then, imperative that the process development effort, and this map, start off on the right foot. Figuring out just what that right foot is, however, is critical and trend-setting in an evolving organization. Key Considerations Enterprise Process Maps are usually not as living and breathing as other process maps. Just as it would be an extremely difficult task to change the foundation of the Sears Tower or a city plan for the entire city of Chicago, the Enterprise Process view of an organization usually remains unchanged once developed (unless, of course, an organization is at a stage where it is capable of true, high-level process innovation). Regardless, the Enterprise Process map is a key first step, and one that must be taken in a precise way. What makes this groundwork solid depends on not only the materials used to construct it (process areas), but also the layout plan and knowledge base of what will be built (the entire process architecture). It seems reasonable that care and consideration are required to create this critical high level map... but what are the important factors? Does the process modeler need to worry about how many process areas there are? About who is looking at it? Should he only use the color pink because it's his boss' favorite color? Interestingly, and perhaps surprisingly, these are all valid considerations that may just require a bit of structure. Below are Three Key Factors to consider when building an Enterprise Process Map: Company Strategic Focus Process Categorization: Customer is Core End-to-end versus Functional Processes Company Strategic Focus As mentioned above, the Enterprise Process Map is created during the Strategy Phase of the Business Process Management Lifecycle. From Oracle Business Process Management methodology for business transformation, it is apparent that business processes exist for the purpose of achieving the strategic objectives of an organization. In a prescribed, top-down approach to process development, it must be ensured that each process fulfills its objectives, and in an aggregated manner, drives fulfillment of the strategic objectives of the company, whether for particular business segments or in a broader sense. This is a crucial point, as the strategic messages of the company must therefore resound in its process maps, in particular one that spans the processes of the complete business: the Enterprise Process Map. One simple example from Company X is shown below (see figure 3). Fig. 3: Company X Enterprise Process Map In reviewing Company X's Enterprise Process Map, one can immediately begin to understand the general strategic mindset of the organization. It shows that Company X is focused on its customers, defining 10 of its process areas belonging to customer-focused categories. Additionally, the organization views these end-customer-oriented process areas as part of customer-fulfilling value chains, while support process areas do not provide as much contiguous value. However, by including both support and strategic process categorizations, it becomes apparent that all processes are considered vital to the success of the customer-oriented focus processes. Below is an example from Company Y (see figure 4). Fig. 4: Company Y Enterprise Process Map Company Y, although also a customer-oriented company, sends a differently focused message with its depiction of the Enterprise Process Map. Along the top of the map is the company's product tree, overarching the process areas, which when executed deliver the products themselves. This indicates one strategic objective of excellence in product quality. Additionally, the view represents a less linear value chain, with strong overlaps of the various process areas. Marketing and quality management are seen as a key support processes, as they span the process lifecycle. Often, companies may incorporate graphics, logos and symbols representing customers and suppliers, and other objects to truly send the strategic message to the business. Other times, Enterprise Process Maps may show high level of responsibility to organizational units, or the application types that support the process areas. It is possible that hundreds of formats and focuses can be applied to an Enterprise Process Map. What is of vital importance, however, is which formats and focuses are chosen to truly represent the direction of the company, and serve as a driver for focusing the business on the strategic objectives set forth in that right. Process Categorization: Customer is Core In the previous two examples, processes were grouped using differing categories and techniques. Company X showed one support and three customer process categorizations using encompassing chevron objects; Customer Y achieved a less distinct categorization using a gradual color scheme. Either way, and in general, modeling of the process areas becomes even more valuable and easily understood within the context of business categorization, be it strategic or otherwise. But how one categorizes their processes is typically more complex than simply choosing object shapes and colors. Previously, it was stated that the ideal is a prescribed top-down approach to developing processes, to make certain linkages all the way back up to corporate strategy. But what about external influences? What forces push and pull corporate strategy? Industry maturity, product lifecycle, market profitability, competition, etc. can all drive the critical success factors of a particular business segment, or the company as a whole, in addition to previous corporate strategy. This may seem to be turning into a discussion of theory, but that is far from the case. In fact, in years of recent study and evolution of the way businesses operate, cross-industry and across the globe, one invariable has surfaced with such strength to make it undeniable in the game plan of any strategy fit for survival. That constant is the customer. Many of a company's critical success factors, in any business segment, relate to the customer: customer retention, satisfaction, loyalty, etc. Businesses serve customers, and so do a business's processes, mapped or unmapped. The most effective way to categorize processes is in a manner that visualizes convergence to what is core for a company. It is the value chain, beginning with the customer in mind, and ending with the fulfillment of that customer, that becomes the core or the centerpiece of the Enterprise Process Map. (See figure 5) Fig. 5: Company Z Enterprise Process Map Company Z has what may be viewed as several different perspectives or "cuts" baked into their Enterprise Process Map. It has divided its processes into three main categories (top, middle, and bottom) of Management Processes, the Core Value Chain and Supporting Processes. The Core category begins with Corporate Marketing (which contains the activities of beginning to engage customers) and ends with Customer Service Management. Within the value chain, this company has divided into the focus areas of their two primary business lines, Foods and Beverages. Does this mean that areas, such as Strategy, Information Management or Project Management are not as important as those in the Core category? No! In some cases, though, depending on the organization's understanding of high-level BPM concepts, use of category names, such as "Core," "Management" or "Support," can be a touchy subject. What is important to understand, is that no matter the nomenclature chosen, the Core processes are those that drive directly to customer value, Support processes are those which make the Core processes possible to execute, and Management Processes are those which steer and influence the Core. Some common terms for these three basic categorizations are Core, Customer Fulfillment, Customer Relationship Management, Governing, Controlling, Enabling, Support, etc. End-to-end versus Functional Processes Every high and low level of process: function, task, activity, process/work step (whatever an organization calls it), should add value to the flow of business in an organization. Suppose that within the process "Deliver package," there is a documented task titled "Stop for ice cream." It doesn't take a process expert to deduce the room for improvement. Though stopping for ice cream may create gain for the one person performing it, it likely benefits neither the organization nor, more importantly, the customer. In most cases, "Stop for ice cream" wouldn't make it past the first pass of To-Be process development. What would make the cut, however, would be a flow of tasks that, each having their own value add, build up to greater and greater levels of process objective. In this case, those tasks would combine to achieve a status of "package delivered." Figure 3 shows a simple example: Just as the package can only be delivered (outcome of the process) without first being retrieved, loaded, and the travel destination reached (outcomes of the process steps), some higher level of process "Play Practical Joke" (e.g., main process or process area) cannot be completed until a package is delivered. It seems that isolated or functionally separated processes, such as "Deliver Package" (shown in Figure 6), are necessary, but are always part of a bigger value chain. Each of these individual processes must be analyzed within the context of that value chain in order to ensure successful end-to-end process performance. For example, this company's "Create Joke Package" process could be operating flawlessly and efficiently, but if a joke is never developed, it cannot be created, so the end-to-end process breaks. Fig. 6: End to End Process Construction That being recognized, it is clear that processes must be viewed as end-to-end, customer-to-customer, and in the context of company strategy. But as can also be seen from the previous example, these vital end-to-end processes cannot be built without the functionally oriented building blocks. Without one, the other cannot be had, or at least not in a complete and organized fashion. As it turns out, but not discussed in depth here, the process modeling effort, BPM organizational development, and comprehensive coverage cannot be fully realized without a semi-functional, process-oriented approach. Then, an Enterprise Process Map should be concerned with both views, the building blocks, and access points to the business-critical end-to-end processes, which they construct. Without the functional building blocks, all streams of work needed for any business transformation would be lost mess of process disorganization. End-to-end views are essential for utilization in optimization in context, understanding customer impacts, base-lining all project phases and aligning objectives. Including both views on an Enterprise Process Map allows management to understand the functional orientation of the company's processes, while still providing access to end-to-end processes, which are most valuable to them. (See figures 7 and 8). Fig. 7: Simplified Enterprise Process Map with end-to-end Access Point The above examples show two unique ways to achieve a successful Enterprise Process Map. The first example is a simple map that shows a high level set of process areas and a separate section with the end-to-end processes of concern for the organization. This particular map is filtered to show just one vital end-to-end process for a project-specific focus. Fig. 8: Detailed Enterprise Process Map showing connected Functional Processes The second example shows a more complex arrangement and categorization of functional processes (the names of each process area has been removed). The end-to-end perspective is achieved at this level through the connections (interfaces at lower levels) between these functional process areas. An important point to note is that the organization of these two views of the Enterprise Process Map is dependent, in large part, on the orientation of its audience, and the complexity of the landscape at the highest level. If both are not apparent, the Enterprise Process Map is missing an opportunity to serve as a holistic, high-level view. Conclusion In the world of BPM, and specifically regarding Enterprise Process Maps, a picture can be worth as many words as the thought and effort that is put into it. Enterprise Process Maps alone cannot change an organization, but they serve more purposes than initially meet the eye, and therefore must be designed in a way that enables a BPM mindset, business process understanding and business transformation efforts. Every Enterprise Process Map will and should be different when looking across organizations. Its design will be driven by company strategy, a level of customer focus, and functional versus end-to-end orientations. This high-level description of the considerations of the Enterprise Process Maps is not a prescriptive "how to" guide. However, a company attempting to create one may not have the practical BPM experience to truly explore its options or impacts to the coming work of business process transformation. The biggest takeaway is that process modeling, at all levels, is a science and an art, and art is open to interpretation. It is critical that the modeler of the highest level of process mapping be a cognoscente of the message he is delivering and the factors at hand. Without sufficient focus on the design of the Enterprise Process Map, an entire BPM effort may suffer. For additional information please check: Oracle Business Process Management.

    Read the article

  • Abstraction, Politics, and Software Architecture

    Abstraction can be defined as a general concept and/or idea that lack any concrete details. Throughout history this type of thinking has led to an array of new ideas and innovations as well as increased confusion and conspiracy. If one was to look back at our history they will see that abstraction has been used in various forms throughout our past. When I was growing up I do not know how many times I heard politicians say “Leave no child left behind” or “No child left behind” as a major part of their campaign rhetoric in regards to a stance on education. As you can see their slogan is a perfect example of abstraction because it only offers a very general concept about improving our education system but they do not mention how they would like to do it. If they did then they would be adding concrete details to their abstraction thus turning it in to an actual working plan as to how we as a society can help children succeed in school and in life, but then they would not be using abstraction. By now I sure you are thinking what does abstraction have to do with software architecture. You are valid in thinking this way, but abstraction is a wonderful tool used in information technology especially in the world of software architecture. Abstraction is one method of extracting the concepts of an idea so that it can be understood and discussed by others of varying technical abilities and backgrounds. One ways in which I tend to extract my architectural design thoughts is through the use of basic diagrams to convey an idea for a system or a new feature for an existing application. This allows me to generically model an architectural design through the use of views and Unified Markup Language (UML). UML is a standard method for creating a 4+1 Architectural View Models. The 4+1 Architectural View Model consists of 4 views typically created with UML as well as a general description of the concept that is being expressed by a model. The 4+1 Architectural View Model: Logical View: Models a system’s end-user functionality. Development View: Models a system as a collection of components and connectors to illustrate how it is intended to be developed.  Process View: Models the interaction between system components and connectors as to indicate the activities of a system. Physical View: Models the placement of the collection of components and connectors of a system within a physical environment. Recently I had to use the concept of abstraction to express an idea for implementing a new security framework on an existing website. My concept would add session based management in order to properly secure and allow page access based on valid user credentials and last user activity.  I created a basic Process View by using UML diagrams to communicate the basic process flow of my changes in the application so that all of the projects stakeholders would be able to understand my idea. Additionally I created a Logical View on a whiteboard while conveying the process workflow with a few stakeholders to show how end-user will be affected by the new framework and gaining additional input about the design. After my Logical and Process Views were accepted I then started on creating a more detailed Development View in order to map how the system will be built based on the concept of components and connections based on the previously defined interactions. I really did not need to create a Physical view for this idea because we were updating an existing system that was already deployed based on an existing Physical View. What do you think about the use of abstraction in the development of software architecture? Please let me know.

    Read the article

  • Podcast Show Notes: Evolving Enterprise Architecture

    - by Bob Rhubart
    Back in March Oracle ACE Directors Mike van Alst (IT-Eye) and Jordan Braunstein (Visual Integrator Consulting) and Oracle product manager Jeff Davies participated in an ArchBeat virtual meet-up. The resulting conversation quickly turned to the changing nature of enterprise architecture and the various forces driving that change. All four parts of that wide-ranging conversation are now available. Listen to Part 1 Listen to Part 2 Listen to Part 3 Listen to Part 4 As you’ll hear, Mike, Jordan, and Jeff bring unique perspectives and opinions to this very lively conversation. These are three very sharp, very experienced guys, as and you might expect, they don’t always walk in lock-step when it comes to EA. You can learn more about Mike, Jordan, and Jeff – and share your opinions with them -- through the links below: Mike van Alst Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn | Business |Oracle Mix | Oracle ACE Profile Jordan Braunstein Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn | Business | Oracle Mix | Oracle ACE Profile Jeff Davies Homepage | Blog | LinkedIn | Oracle Mix (Also check out Jeff’s book: The Definitive Guide to SOA: Oracle Service Bus) Up Next Next week’s program features highlights from the panel discussion at the Oracle Technology Architect Day event held in Anaheim, CA on May 19. You’ll hear from Oracle ACE Directors Basheer Khan and Floyd Teter, Oracle virtualization expert and former Sun Microsystems principal engineer Jeff Savit, Oracle security analyst Geri Born, and event MC Ralf Dossman, Director of SOA and Middleware in Oracle’s Enterprise Solutions Group. Stay tuned: RSS

    Read the article

  • Naming a class that decides to retrieve things from cache or a service + architecture evaluation

    - by Thomas Stock
    Hi, I'm a junior developer and I'm working on a pet project that I want to learn as much as possible from. I have the following scenario: There's a WCF service that I use to retrieve and update data, lets say Cars. So it's called CarWCFService and has a GetCars(), SaveCar(), ... . It implements interface ICarService. This isn't the Actual WCF service but more like a wrapper around it. Upon retrieving data from the service, I want to store them in local memory, as cache. I have made a class for this called CarCacheService which also implements interface ICarService. (I will explain later why it implements ICarService) I don't want client code to be calling these implementations. Instead, I want to create a third implementation for ICarService that tries to read from the CarCacheService before calling the WCFCarService, stores retrieved data in the CarCacheService, etc. 3 questions: How do I name this third class? I was thinking about something as simple as CarService. This does not really says what the service does exactly, tho. Is the naming for the other classes good? Would this naming and architecture be obvious for future programmers? This is my biggest concern. Does this architecture make sense? The reason that I implement ICarService on the CarCacheService is mainly because it allows me to fake the WCFService while debugging. I can store dummy data in a CarCacheService instance and pass it to the CarService, together with an(other) empty CarCacheService. If I made CacheCarService and WCFService public I could let client code decide if they want to drop the caching and just work directly on the WCFService.

    Read the article

  • software architecture (OO design) refresher course

    - by PeterT
    I am lead developer and team lead in a small RAD team. Deadlines are tight and we have to release often, which we do, and this is what keep the business happy. While we (the development team) are trying to maintain the quality of the code (clean and short methods), I can't help but notice that the overall quality of the OO design&architecture is getting worse over the time - the library we are working on is gradually reducing itself to a "bag of functions". Well, we try to use the design patterns, but since we don't really have much time for a design as such we are mostly using the creational ones. I have read Code Complete / Design Patterns (GOF & enterprise) / Progmatic Programmer / and many books from Effective XXX series. Should I re-read them again as I have read them a long time ago and forgotten quite a lot, or there are other / better OO design / software architeture books been published since then which I should definitely read? Any ideas, recommendations on how can I get the situation under control and start improving the architecture. The way I see it - I will start improving the architectural / design quality of software components I am working on and then will start helping other team members once I find what is working for me.

    Read the article

  • Software Design Idea for multi tier architecture

    - by Preyash
    I am currently investigating multi tier architecture design for a web based application in MVC3. I already have an architecture but not sure if its the best I can do in terms of extendability and performance. The current architecure has following components DataTier (Contains EF POCO objects) DomainModel (Contains Domain related objects) Global (Among other common things it contains Repository objects for CRUD to DB) Business Layer (Business Logic and Interaction between Data and Client and CRUD using repository) Web(Client) (which talks to DomainModel and Business but also have its own ViewModels for Create and Edit Views for e.g.) Note: I am using ValueInjector for convering one type of entity to another. (which is proving an overhead in this desing. I really dont like over doing this.) My question is am I having too many tiers in the above architecure? Do I really need domain model? (I think I do when I exposes my Business Logic via WCF to external clients). What is happening is that for a simple database insert it (1) create ViewModel (2) Convert ViewModel to DomainModel for Business to understand (3) Business Convert it to DataModel for Repository and then data comes back in the same order. Few things to consider, I am not looking for a perfect architecure solution as it does not exits. I am looking for something that is scalable. It should resuable (for e.g. using design patterns ,interfaces, inheritance etc.) Each Layers should be easily testable. Any suggestions or comments is much appriciated. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Best peer-to-peer game architecture

    - by Dejw
    Consider a setup where game clients: have quite small computing resources (mobile devices, smartphones) are all connected to a common router (LAN, hotspot etc) The users want to play a multiplayer game, without an external server. One solution is to host an authoritative server on one phone, which in this case would be also a client. Considering point 1 this solution is not acceptable, since the phone's computing resources are not sufficient. So, I want to design a peer-to-peer architecture that will distribute the game's simulation load among the clients. Because of point 2 the system needn't be complex with regards to optimization; the latency will be very low. Each client can be an authoritative source of data about himself and his immediate environment (for example bullets.) What would be the best approach to designing such an architecture? Are there any known examples of such a LAN-level peer-to-peer protocol? Notes: Some of the problems are addressed here, but the concepts listed there are too high-level for me. Security I know that not having one authoritative server is a security issue, but it is not relevant in this case as I'm willing to trust the clients. Edit: I forgot to mention: it will be a rather fast-paced game (a shooter). Also, I have already read about networking architectures at Gaffer on Games.

    Read the article

  • Correct architecture for running and stopping complex tasks in the background

    - by Phonon
    I'm having trouble working out the correct architecture for the following task. I have a GUI in Windows Forms that contains a ListBox, listing certain architectural layouts. One an item in this list is selected, a custom Control displays an interactive visualization of the selected layout. Drawing of this interactive diagram is a CPU-intensive task, and can take up to a second on my machine. The kind of functionality I'm trying to achieve is that if a user wants to quickly scroll through the layouts in the ListBox (say, holding down the down arrow key), I don't want my computer to sit there thinking about how to draw the layout before it allows the user to do anything else. The obvious answer is, of course, to run the layout calculations in a separate thread. But how do I make that thread return a whole control? How do I make sure I'm not running two layout calculations at once? I'm fairly new to this complex GUI business. So the real question is what is the right architecture to implement something like this? This seems like something people do all the time, but finding any suggestions on how to do it properly is really difficult.

    Read the article

  • Architecture of a "website generator" web application

    - by Resorath
    What is the most maintainable and efficient way to architect a web application who's purpose is to host and generate websites which can be customized to a certain degree? There are a lot of these style of applications in the wild that generate all kinds of sites, from sites that host World of Warcraft guilds like guildlaunch to other sites like my wedding for wedding site hosting. My question is, what is the basic architecture that these sites operate on? I imagine there are two ways of thinking about this. A central set of code that all sites on the host run against, and it acts differently based on which site was visited. In this manner, when the base code is updated all sites are updated simultaneously. Or, the code for an individual site exists in a silo, and is simply replicated to a new directory each time a site is created. When an update needs to be applied, the code is pushed out to each site silo. In my case, I am working in PHP with the CodeIgniter framework, however the answer need not be limited to this case. Which method (if any) creates a more maintainable and efficient architecture to manage this style of web application?

    Read the article

  • Impact of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) on Business and IT Operations

    The impact of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) on business and IT operations varies from company to company. I think more and more companies are starting to view SOA as just another technology that they can incorporate in an existing or new system. One of the driving factors in using SOA is the reduction in maintenance costs and decrease in the time needed to bring products to market. The reductions in costs, and reduced turnaround time can be directly converted in to increased profitability due to less expenditures that are needed in order to maintain or create new systems. My personal perspective on SOA is that it is great for what it is actually intended to do. SOA allows systems to be distributed across networks or even the world while ensuring enterprise processing consistency, data integrity and preventing code duplication. This being said a lot of preparation and work goes into properly designing and implementing an SOA especially if an enterprise wants to take full advantage of its benefits. Even though SOA has recently gotten a lot of hype about its benefits it does not a perfect fit for all situations. At the end of the day SOA is just another tool in my tool belt that I can pull from to create solutions that meet the business’s needs. Based on current industry trends SOA appears to be a very solid technology to use moving forward, especially as more and more companies shift towards cloud based computing. It is important to remember that SOA is one of many technologies that can be used in creating business solutions and I think more time will be spent in the future evaluating if SOA is the right technology for a solution once the initial hype of SOA has calmed down.

    Read the article

  • Server-side Architecture for Online Game

    - by Draiken
    basically I have a game client that has communicate with a server for almost every action it takes, the game is in Java (using LWJGL) and right now I will start making the server. The base of the game is normally one client communicating with the server alone, but I will require later on for several clients to work together for some functionalities. I've already read how authentication server should be sepparated and I intend on doing it. The problem is I am completely inexperienced in this kind of server-side programming, all I've ever programmed were JSF web applications. I imagine I'll do socket connections for pretty much every game communication since HTML is very slow, but I still don't really know where to start on my server. I would appreciate reading material or guidelines on where to start, what architecture should the game server have and maybe some suggestions on frameworks that could help me getting the client-server communication. I've looked into JNAG but I have no experience with this kind of thing, so I can't really tell if it is a solid and good messaging layer. Any help is appreciated... Thanks ! EDIT: Just a little more information about the game. It is intended to be a very complex game with several functionalities, making some functionalities a "program" inside the program. It is not an usual game, like FPS or RPG but I intend on having a lot of users using these many different "programs" inside the game. If I wasn't clear enough, I'd really appreciate people that have already developed games with java client/server architecture, how they communicated, any frameworks, apis, messaging systems, etc. It is not a question of lack of knowledge of language, more a question for advice, so I don't end up creating something that works, but in the later stages will have to be rewriten for any kind of limiting reason. PS: sorry if my english is not perfect...

    Read the article

  • Modular Architecture for Processing Pipeline

    - by anjruu
    I am trying to design the architecture of a system that I will be implementing in C++, and I was wondering if people could think of a good approach, or critique the approach that I have designed so far. First of all, the general problem is an image processing pipeline. It contains several stages, and the goal is to design a highly modular solution, so that any of the stages can be easily swapped out and replaced with a piece of custom code (so that the user can have a speed increase if s/he knows that a certain stage is constrained in a certain way in his or her problem). The current thinking is something like this: struct output; /*Contains the output values from the pipeline.*/ class input_routines{ public: virtual foo stage1(...){...} virtual bar stage2(...){...} virtual qux stage3(...){...} ... } output pipeline(input_routines stages); This would allow people to subclass input_routines and override whichever stage they wanted. That said, I've worked in systems like this before, and I find the subclassing and the default stuff tends to get messy, and can be difficult to use, so I'm not giddy about writing one myself. I was also thinking about a more STLish approach, where the different stages (there are 6 or 7) would be defaulted template parameters. Can anyone offer a critique of the pattern above, thoughts on the template approach, or any other architecture that comes to mind?

    Read the article

  • Why do enterprise app programmers get higher salaries than web programmers

    - by jpartogi
    I am an enterprise app programmer, mainly using Java, but now I want to move into web programming and build websites that are visited by millions of users. But what is surprising to me is that the salary level is so much different. A Java programmer seems to get a higher salary than a web programmer. Why is this so? Is it perceived that Java/enterprise applications are more difficult, thus the programmers get a higher salary?

    Read the article

  • The Interaction between Three-Tier Client/Server Model and Three-Tier Application Architecture Model

    The three-tier client/server model is a network architectural approach currently used in modern networking. This approach divides a network in to three distinct components. Three-Tier Client/Server Model Components Client Component Server Component Database Component The Client Component of the network typically represents any device on the network. A basic example of this would be computer or another network/web enabled devices that are connected to a network. Network clients request resources on the network, and are usually equipped with a user interface for the presentation of the data returned from the Server Component. This process is done through the use of various software clients, and example of this can be seen through the use of a web browser client. The web browser request information from the Server Component located on the network and then renders the results for the user to process. The Server Components of the network return data based on specific client request back to the requesting client.  Server Components also inherit the attributes of a Client Component in that they are a device on the network and that they can also request information from other Server Components. However what differentiates a Client Component from a Server Component is that a Server Component response to requests from devices on the network. An example of a Server Component can be seen in a web server. A web server listens for new requests and then interprets the request, processes the web pages, and then returns the processed data back to the web browser client so that it may render the data for the user to interpret. The Database Component of the network returns unprocessed data from databases or other resources. This component also inherits attributes from the Server Component in that it is a device on a network, it can request information from other server components and database components, and it also listens for new requests so that it can return data when needed. The three-tier client/server model is very similar to the three-tier application architecture model, and in fact the layers can be mapped to one another. Three-Tier Application Architecture Model Presentation Layer/Logic Business Layer/Logic Data Layer/Logic The Presentation Layer including its underlying logic is very similar to the Client Component of the three-tiered model. The Presentation Layer focuses on interpreting the data returned by the Business Layer as well as presents the data back to the user.  Both the Presentation Layer and the Client Component focus primarily on the user and their experience. This allows for segments of the Business Layer to be distributable and interchangeable because the Presentation Layer is not directly integrated in with Business Layer. The Presentation Layer does not care where the data comes from as long as it is in the proper format. This allows for the Presentation Layer and Business Layer to be stored on one or more different servers so that it can provide a higher availability to clients requesting data. A good example of this is a web site that uses load balancing. When a web site decides to take on the task of load balancing they must obtain a network device that sits in front of a one or machines in order to distribute the request across multiple servers. When a user comes in through the load balanced device they are redirected to a specific server based on a few factors. Common Load Balancing Factors Current Server Availability Current Server Response Time Current Server Priority The Business Layer and corresponding logic are business rules applied to data prior to it being sent to the Presentation Layer. These rules are used to manipulate the data coming from the Data Access Layer, in addition to validating any data prior to being stored in the Data Access Layer. A good example of this would be when a user is trying to create multiple accounts under one email address. The Business Layer logic can prevent duplicate accounts by enforcing a unique email for every new account before the data is even stored in the Data Access Layer. The Server Component can be directly tied to this layer in that the server typically stores and process the Business Layer before it is returned to the end-user via the Presentation Layer. In addition the Server Component can also run automated process through the Business Layer on the data in the Data Access Layer so that additional business analysis can be derived from the data that has been already collected. The Data Layer and its logic are responsible for storing information so that it can be easily retrieved. Typical in most modern applications data is stored in a database management system however data can also be in the form of files stored on a file server. In addition a database can take on one of several forms. Common Database Formats XML File Pipe Delimited File Tab Delimited File Comma Delimited File (CSV) Plain Text File Microsoft Access Microsoft SQL Server MySql Oracle Sybase The Database component of the Networking model can be directly tied to the Data Layer because this is where the Data Layer obtains the data to return back the Business Layer. The Database Component basically allows for a place on the network to store data for future use. This enables applications to save data when they can and then quickly recall the saved data as needed so that the application does not have to worry about storing the data in memory. This prevents overhead that could be created when an application must retain all data in memory. As you can see the Three-Tier Client/Server Networking Model and the Three-Tiered Application Architecture Model rely very heavily on one another to function especially if different aspects of an application are distributed across an entire network. The use of various servers and database servers are wonderful when an application has a need to distribute work across the network. Network Components and Application Layers Interaction Database components will store all data needed for the Data Access Layer to manipulate and return to the Business Layer Server Component executes the Business Layer that manipulates data so that it can be returned to the Presentation Layer Client Component hosts the Presentation Layer that  interprets the data and present it to the user

    Read the article

  • Bringing true agility to enterprise .NET: Tellago Studios announces TeleSharp

    - by gsusx
    We are happy to announce the latest addition to Tellago Studios’ product family: TeleSharp . After the success of SO-Aware and the SO-Aware Test Workbench , we decided to tackle on a bigger challenge by taking the initial steps towards simplifying enterprise .NET application development. After months of discussion with customers we decided to focus on the following challenges: Cataloging Applications What if you could keep a central catalog of the .NET applications exist on your enterprise? What...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Oracle Enterprise Manager content at Collaborate 12 - the only user-driven and user-run Oracle conference

    - by Anand Akela
    From April 22-26, 2012, Oracle takes Las Vegas. Thousands of Oracle professionals will descend upon the Mandalay Bay Convention Center for a weeks worth of education sessions, networking opportunities and more, at the only user-driven and user-run Oracle conference - COLLABORATE 12. This is one of the best opportunities for you to learn more about Oracle technology including Oracle Enterprise Manager. Here is a summary of an impressive line-up of Oracle Enterprise Manager related content at COLLABORATE 12. Customer Presentations Stability in Real World with SQL Plan Management Upgrading to Oracle Enterprise Manager 12c - Best Practices Making OEM Sing and Dance with EMCLI Oracle Real Application Testing: A look under the hood Optimizing Oracle E-Business Suite on Exadata Experiences with OracleVM 3 and Grid Control in an Oracle BIEE environment. Right Cloud-- How to Avoid the False Cloud by using Oracle Technologies Forgetting something? Standarize your database monitoring environment with Enterprise Manager 11g Implementing E-Business Suite R12 in a Federal Cloud - Lessons Learned Cloud Computing Boot Camp: New DBA Features in Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control 12c Oracle Enterprise Manager 12c, Whats Changed, Whats New? Monitoring a WebCenter Content Deployment with Enterprise Manager Enterprise Manager 12c Cloud Control: New Features and Best Practices (for IOUG registrants only) Oracle Presentations Roadmap Session: Total Cloud Control with Oracle Enterprise Manager 12c Real World Performance (complimentary for IOUG registrants only) Database-as-a-Service: Enterprise Cloud in Three Simple Steps Bullet-proof Your Enterprise, SOA & Cloud Investments Using Oracle Enterprise Gateway What’s New for Oracle WebLogic Management: Capabilities that Scripting Cannot Provide Exadata Boot Camp: Complete Oracle Exadata Management with Oracle Enterprise Manager Stay connected with  Oracle Enterprise Manager   :  Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Linkedin | Newsletter

    Read the article

  • How to evaluate "enterprise" platforms?

    - by Ran Biron
    Hi all, I'm tasked with evaluating an "enterprise" platform for the next-gen version of a product. We're currently considering two "types" of platforms - RAD (workflow engine, integrated UI, small cores of "technology plugins" to the workflows, automatic persisting of state...) like SalesForce.com / Service-Now.com and "cloud based" (EC2 / AppEngine...). While I have a few ideas on where to start, I'd like your opinions - how would you evaluate platforms for an enterprise suite of products? What factors would you consider? How would you eliminate weak options quickly enough to be able to concentrate on the few strong ones? Also interesting is how would you compare enterprise RAD (proven technology, quick to develop - but tends to look "the same as the competition") to cloud-based technology (lots of "buzz", not that many competitors - easy to justify to management, but probably lacking (?) enterprise tools and experience). As said before - I have a few ideas, but would like to see some answers before I post mine so I wouldn't drive the discussion to a specific place. RB.

    Read the article

  • S#arp Architecture 1.5.1 released

    - by AlecWhittington
    So far we have had some great success with the 1.5 release of S#arp Architecture, but there were a few issues that made it into the release that needed to be corrected. These issues were: Unnecessary assemblies in the root /bin and SolutionItemsContainer folders Nant folder removed from root /bin - this was causing issues with the build scripts that come with the project if the user did not have Nant installed and available via a path variable VS 2010 template - the CrudScaffoldingForEnterpriseApp...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Single API Architecture

    - by user1901686
    When people refer to an architecture that involves a single service API that all clients talk to (a client can be an iPad app, etc), what is the "client" for the web app -- is it A) the web browser itself. Thus, the entire app is written in html/css/javascript and ajax calls to the service are made to fetch data and changes are made through javascript or B) you have an MVC-like stack on a server, only instead of the controllers calling to the model layer directly, they call to the service API which return models that are used to render the traditional views or C) something else?

    Read the article

  • Managing Social Relationships for the Enterprise – Part 1

    - by kellsey.ruppel
    By Reggie Bradford, Senior Vice President, Oracle  Today, Mark Hurd, President of Oracle, Thomas Kurian, Executive Vice President of Oracle and I discussed the strategic importance of how social media is impacting the enterprise and how it is changing the way customers, prospects employees and investors interact with brands worldwide.  Oracle understands that the consumer is in control and as such, brands must evolve and change to meet growing needs. In addition, according to social media thought leader and Analyst from Altimeter Group, Jeremiah Owyang, companies now average 178 corporate-owned social media accounts. When Oracle added leading social marketing, listening analytics and development tools from Vitrue, Collective Intellect and Involver to its Oracle’s Cloud Services Suite we went beyond providing a single set of tools. We developed an entire framework to include a comprehensive social relationship management suite to help companies move beyond the social enterprise and achieve the social-enabled enterprise.  The fundamental shift from transaction to engagement means that enterprises need not only a social strategy, but should also ensure that the information and data received from social initiatives flow back to marketing, sales, support and service. Doing so enables companies to deliver a proactive and compelling experience and provides analytics to turn engagement into opportunity – and ultimately that opportunity into revenue.  On September 13, 2012, I am delighted to sit down with Jeremiah to further the discussion about how enterprises are addressing social media strategies and managing content.  In addition, we will be taking your questions after the webinar via Twitter (@Oracle, @ReggieBradford, @cfinn, @jowyang). Use #oracle and #socbiz to submit questions and follow the conversation. I look forward to speaking with you and answering your questions online.  For more information about becoming a social-enabled enterprise, visit www.oracle.com/social. And don’t miss the insights of other social business thought leaders at www.oracle.com/goto/socialbusiness.

    Read the article

  • Enterprise Manager Grid Control licencelése

    - by Lajos Sárecz
    Gyakran kapok kérdéseket az Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control licencelésével kapcsolatban, ezért az alábbiakban igyekszem összefoglalni a legfontosabb információkat. Az alábbi ismerteto nem teljes köru, mivel számos olyan termék van (Data Masking, Real Application Testing, Real User Experience Insight, Application Testing Suite), melyek kapcsolódnak az Enterprise Manager-hez, azonban licencelésük másképp muködik. Az Enterprise Manager licenceléssel kapcsolatban az elsodleges információ forrás a Licensing Information doksi. A legfontosabb információk: - A Grid Control keretrendszer (Agent-ek és a konzol az alapfunkciókkal - lásd késobb) önmagában ingyenes, sot restricted-use licencet tartalmaz Oracle Database-re, amennyiben azt csak az Oracle Management Repository céljára használják. Fontos, hogy ez nem tartalmaz egyéb Oracle Database opciókat, mint például a RAC! Hasonlóképpen az Oracle WebLogic Server is kizárólagosan az Oracle Management Server kiszolgálására használható ingyenesen, de fürtözés nélkül. - A Grid Control alapfunkcionalitása: Discovery, Groups, Job Scheduling, Real time availability, Performance & monitoring, Target Home Pages, Administration, Console alerts - Az alapfunkcionalitás felügyelt termékektol függoen bovítheto Management Pack, Plug-in és Connector termékekkel. Alapvetoen ezek licencelése mindig a monitorozott, felügyelt termék licenceléséhez kell, hogy igazodjon. Tehát például ha 2 adatbázis szerverre szeretnénk Diagnostic Pack-ek használni, akkor mindkettore kell CPU vagy NUP (Named User Plus) licencet vásárolni, attól függoen az adatbázis maga milyen licenccel rendelkezik. Megjegyzem ezt a konkrét Management Pack-ek kizárólag Enterprise Edition Database esetén lehet alkalmazni. - Számos fizetos funkció külön telepítés nélkül is elérheto a Grid Control felületén (ugyanez igaz Database Control-ra és Fusion Middleware Control-ra is). Hogy elkerüljük a licenc sértést, érdemes ellenorízni hogy az adott környezetben mely Management Pack-ek használata került bekapcsolásra. Ezt a Grid Control Setup menüjében a Management Pack Access almenüben tehetjük meg legegyszerubben. Részleteseb leírás itt található. Database Diagnostic és Tuning Pack adatbázis szintu kikapcsolására is lehetoség van, hogy parancssorból se lehessen használni oket, errol korábban már írtam. Az egyes management termékek USD ára megtalálható az árlistában. Ha valami fontos kimaradt, várom a kérdéseket, hozzászólásokat, és igény szerint bovítem a fentieket.

    Read the article

  • Major Analyst Report Chooses Oracle As An ECM Leader

    - by brian.dirking(at)oracle.com
    Oracle announced that Gartner, Inc. has named Oracle as a Leader in its latest "Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Content Management" in a press release issued this morning. Gartner's Magic Quadrant reports position vendors within a particular quadrant based on their completeness of vision and ability to execute. According to Gartner, "Leaders have the highest combined scores for Ability to Execute and Completeness of Vision. They are doing well and are prepared for the future with a clearly articulated vision. In the context of ECM, they have strong channel partners, presence in multiple regions, consistent financial performance, broad platform support and good customer support. In addition, they dominate in one or more technology or vertical market. Leaders deliver a suite that addresses market demand for direct delivery of the majority of core components, though these are not necessarily owned by them, tightly integrated, unique or best-of-breed in each area. We place more emphasis this year on demonstrated enterprise deployments; integration with other business applications and content repositories; incorporation of Web 2.0 and XML capabilities; and vertical-process and horizontal-solution focus. Leaders should drive market transformation." "To extend content governance and best practices across the enterprise, organizations need an enterprise content management solution that delivers a broad set of functionality and is tightly integrated with business processes," said Andy MacMillan, vice president, Product Management, Oracle. "We believe that Oracle's position as a Leader in this report is recognition of the industry-leading performance, integration and scalability delivered in Oracle Enterprise Content Management Suite 11g." With Oracle Enterprise Content Management Suite 11g, Oracle offers a comprehensive, integrated and high-performance content management solution that helps organizations increase efficiency, reduce costs and improve content security. In the report, Oracle is grouped among the top three vendors for execution, and is the furthest to the right, placing Oracle as the most visionary vendor. This vision stems from Oracle's integration of content management right into key business processes, delivering content in context as people need it. Using a PeopleSoft Accounts Payable user as an example, as an employee processes an invoice, Oracle ECM Suite brings that invoice up on the screen so the processor can verify the content right in the process, improving speed and accuracy. Oracle integrates content into business processes such as Human Resources, Travel and Expense, and others, in the major enterprise applications such as PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Siebel, and E-Business Suite. As part of Oracle's Enterprise Application Documents strategy, you can see an example of these integrations in this webinar: Managing Customer Documents and Marketing Assets in Siebel. You can also get a white paper of the ROI Embry Riddle achieved using Oracle Content Management integrated with enterprise applications. Embry Riddle moved from a point solution for content management on accounts payable to an infrastructure investment - they are now using Oracle Content Management for accounts payable with Oracle E-Business Suite, and for student on-boarding with PeopleSoft e-Campus. They continue to expand their use of Oracle Content Management to address further use cases from a core infrastructure. Oracle also shows its vision in the ability to deliver content optimized for online channels. Marketers can use Oracle ECM Suite to deliver digital assets and offers as part of an integrated campaign that understands website visitors and ensures that they are given the most pertinent information and offers. Oracle also provides full lifecycle management through its built-in records management. Companies are able to manage the lifecycle of content (both records and non-records) through built-in retention management. And with the integration of Oracle ECM Suite and Sun Storage Archive Manager, content can be routed to the appropriate storage media based upon content type, usage data or other business rules. This ensures that the most accessed content is instantly available, and archived content is stored on a more appropriate medium like tape. You can learn more in this webinar - Oracle Content Management and Sun Tiered Storage. If you are interested in reading more about why Oracle was chosen as a Leader, view the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Content Management.

    Read the article

  • 3 tier architecture in objective-c

    - by hba
    I just finished reading the objective-c developer handbook from apple. So I pretty much know everything that there is to know about objective-c (hee hee hee). I was wondering how do I go about designing a 3-tier application in objective-c. The 3-tiers being a front-end application in Cocoa, a middle-tier in pure objective-c and a back-end (data access also in objective-c and mysql db). I'm not really interested in discussing why I'd need a 3-tier architecture, I'd like to narrow the discussion to the 'how'. For example, can I have 3 separate x-code projects one for each tier? If so how would I link the projects together. In java, I can export each tier as a jar file and form the proper associations.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >