Search Results

Search found 33587 results on 1344 pages for 'case management'.

Page 44/1344 | < Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >

  • Business Case for investing time developing Stubs and BizUnit Tests

    - by charlie.mott
    I was recently in a position where I had to justify why effort should be spent developing Stubbed Integration Tests for BizTalk solutions. These tests are usually developed using the BizUnit framework. I assumed that most seasoned BizTalk developers would consider this best practice. Even though Microsoft suggest use of BizUnit on MSDN, I've not found a single site listing the justifications for investing time writing stubs and BizUnit tests. Stubs Stubs should be developed to isolate your development team from external dependencies. This is described by Michael Stephenson here. Failing to do this can result in the following problems: In contract-first scenarios, the external system interface will have been defined.  But the interface may not have been setup or even developed yet for the BizTalk developers to work with. By the time you open the target location to see the data BizTalk has sent, it may have been swept away. If you are relying on the UI of the target system to see the data BizTalk has sent, what do you do if it fails to arrive? It may take time for the data to be processed or it may be scheduled to be processed later. Learning how to use the source\target systems and investigations into where things go wrong in these systems will slow down the BizTalk development effort. By the time the data is visible in a UI it may have undergone further transformations. In larger development teams working together, do you all use the same source and target instances. How do you know which data was created by whose tests? How do you know which event log error message are whose?  Another developer may have “cleaned up” your data. It is harder to write BizUnit tests that clean up the data\logs after each test run. What if your B2B partners' source or target system cannot support the sort of testing you want to do. They may not even have a development or test instance that you can work with. Their single test instance may be used by the SIT\UAT teams. There may be licencing costs of setting up an instances of the external system. The stubs I like to use are generic stubs that can accept\return any message type.  Usually I need to create one per protocol. They should be driven by BizUnit steps to: validates the data received; and select a response messages (or error response). Once built, they can be re-used for many integration tests and from project to project. I’m not saying that developers should never test against a real instance.  Every so often, you still need to connect to real developer or test instances of the source and target endpoints\services. The interface developers may ask you to send them some data to see if everything still works.  Or you might want some messages sent to BizTalk to get confidence that everything still works beyond BizTalk. Tests Automated “Stubbed Integration Tests” are usually built using the BizUnit framework. These facilitate testing of the entire integration process from source stub to target stub. It will ensure that all of the BizTalk components are configured together correctly to meet all the requirements. More fine grained unit testing of individual BizTalk components is still encouraged.  But BizUnit provides much the easiest way to test some components types (e.g. Orchestrations). Using BizUnit with the Behaviour Driven Development approach described by Mike Stephenson delivers the following benefits: source: http://biztalkbddsample.codeplex.com – Video 1. Requirements can be easily defined using Given/When/Then Requirements are close to the code so easier to manage as features and scenarios Requirements are defined in domain language The feature files can be used as part of the documentation The documentation is accurate to the build of code and can be published with a release The scenarios are effective to document the scenarios and are not over excessive The scenarios are maintained with the code There’s an abstraction between the intention and implementation of tests making them easier to understand The requirements drive the testing These same tests can also be used to drive load testing as described here. If you don't do this ... If you don't follow the above “Stubbed Integration Tests” approach, the developer will need to manually trigger the tests. This has the following risks: Developers are unlikely to check all the scenarios each time and all the expected conditions each time. After the developer leaves, these manual test steps may be lost. What test scenarios are there?  What test messages did they use for each scenario? There is no mechanism to prove adequate test coverage. A test team may attempt to automate integration test scenarios in a test environment through the triggering of tests from a source system UI. If this is a replacement for BizUnit tests, then this carries the following risks: It moves the tests downstream, so problems will be found later in the process. Testers may not check all the expected conditions within the BizTalk infrastructure such as: event logs, suspended messages, etc. These automated tests may also get in the way of manual tests run on these environments.

    Read the article

  • Case convention- Why the variation between languages?

    - by Jason
    Coming from a Java background, I'm very used to camelCase. When writing C, using the underscore wasn't a big adjustment, since it was only used sparingly when writing simple Unix apps. In the meantime, I stuck with camelCase as my style, as did most of the class. However, now that I'm teaching myself C# in preparation for my upcoming Usability Design class in the fall, the PascalCase convention of the language is really tripping me up and I'm having to rely on intellisense a great deal in order to make sure the correct API method is being used. To be honest, switching to the PascalCase layout hasn't quite sunk in the muscle memory just yet, and that is frustrating from my point of view. Since C# and Java are considered to be brother languages, as both are descended from C++, why the variation in the language conventions? Was it a personal decision by the creators based on their comfort level, or was it just to play mindgames with new introductees to the language?

    Read the article

  • Adding Custom Reports to SQL Server Management Studio

    In this tip, Koen Verbeeck explores how to apply business intelligence solutions to administrative tasks, specifically creating custom reports and adding them to SQL Server Management Studio. An accidental DBA? Try SQL MonitorUse the 30-day full product free trial to get easy-to-understand insights into SQL Server, and get suggestions on how to solve the type of issues that are uncovered. Begin your free trial.

    Read the article

  • What type of pattern would be used in this case

    - by Admiral Kunkka
    I want to know how to tackle this type of scenario. We are building a person's background, from scratch, and I want to know, conceptually, how to proceed with a secure object pattern in both design and execution... I've been reading on Factory patterns, Model-View-Controller types, Dependency injection, Singleton approaches... and I can't seem to grasp or 'fit' these types of designs decisions into what I'm trying to do.. First and foremost, I started with having a big jack-of-all-trades class, then I read some more, and some tips were to make sure your classes only have a single purpose.. which makes sense and I started breaking down certain things into other classes. Okay, cool. Now I'm looking at dependency injection and kind of didn't really know what's going on. Example/insight of what kind of heirarchy I need to accomplish... class Person needs to access and build from a multitude of different classes. class Culture needs to access a sub-class for culture benefits class Social needs to access class Culture, and other sub-classes class Birth needs to access Social, Culture, and other sub-classes class Childhood/Adolescence/Adulthood need to access everything. Also, depending on different rolls, this class heirarchy needs to create multiple people as well, such as Family, and their backgrounds using some, if not all, of these same classes. Think of it as a people generator, all random, with backgrounds and things that happen to them. Ageing, death of loved ones, military careers, e.t.c. Most of the generation is done randomly, making calls to a mt_rand function to pick from most of the selections inside the classes, guaranteeing the data to be absolutely random. I have most of the bulk-data down, and was looking for some insight from fellow programmers, what do you think?

    Read the article

  • News from OpenWorld: Innovation Across Fusion Middleware Product Portfolio

    - by Tanu Sood
    Oracle today announced that it continues to drive innovation across its Oracle Fusion Middleware product suite and extend industry’s #1 business innovation platform for the enterprise and the cloud.   Innovations across Oracle Fusion Middleware product portfolio help customers and partners to innovate, cut costs, and reduce complexity. Oracle Fusion Middleware components include  Oracle SOA Suite, Oracle WebLogic Server, Oracle WebCenter, Oracle Business Intelligence, Oracle Identity Management and Oracle Data Integration. Additional Resources: Press Release: Oracle announces Identity Management 11g Release 2 Press Release: Oracle announces Oracle Identity Governance Suite Press Release: Oracle announces Oracle Privileged Account Manager Website: Oracle Identity Management On-Demand webcast: Identity Management 11gR2 Launch Oracle Magazine: Security on the Move

    Read the article

  • Upgrading to Oracle Enterprise Performance Management Version 11.1.2

    Oracle Enterprise Performance Management Version 11.1.2 offers many great new features for customers upgrading from previous versions of their Hyperion applications. This webcast discusses the benefits of these new features plus the best way to go about planning and implementing the upgrade. AMOSCA, an Oracle Platinum Partner has already completed 15 Oracle EPM upgrades to Version 11.1.x with its customers. Noel Gorvett, Managing Director of AMOSCA shares their experiences of these upgrades to help customers currently considering upgrading to make the best decisions when planning and implementing their upgrade.

    Read the article

  • This Week on the Green Data Center Management Front

    Among the big news this week in green data center management: Equinix was granted LEED certification for its 2009 retrofit of its Silicon Valley SV2 International Business Exchange facility, Neuwing Energy Ventures announced it successfully registered the first voluntary Energy Efficiency Certificates in the newly launched APX North American Renewables Registry, and more.

    Read the article

  • PeopleSoft's Enterprise Financial Management 8.9

    Fred interviews Annette Melatti, Senior Director Financials Product Marketing and discusses the latest release and the value this release offers to customers including compliance, superior ownership experience, industry specific solution extensions, enhancements to the enterprise service automation solution and the introduction of the new asset lifecycle management solution.

    Read the article

  • API Management Video

    - by Michael Stephenson
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/michaelstephenson/archive/2014/08/03/157900.aspxJust wanted to put the word out that the API Management video from the recent user group meeting is available.  The page on the below link has resources from that meeting:http://ukcsug.co.uk/past-events/2014-07-07/ Also we have out next two meetings available for registration at the following links:Hybrid Connectionshttps://www.eventbrite.com/e/azure-biztalk-services-hybrid-connections-tickets-12216617231?aff=eorg Hybrid Integration with Dynamics CRMhttps://www.eventbrite.com/e/hybrid-integration-with-microsoft-dynamics-crm-tickets-12398067955?aff=eorg

    Read the article

  • User management system and DELETE action - usability

    - by šljaker
    I'm working on User Management System in ASP.NET MVC3. Administrator/Editor can search, insert, update and delete other users from the system. What should I do when admin/editor clicks on Delete user link? Should I redirect him to new yes/no confirmation page or display some jquery popup window? Should I then redirect him to the home page and display message 'The user has been successfully deleted from the system', or simple redirection should be just fine?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >