Search Results

Search found 5410 results on 217 pages for 'n tier architecture'.

Page 76/217 | < Previous Page | 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83  | Next Page >

  • Does Zend application server provide any sort of pushed-based messaging architecture support?

    - by Alex
    Does Zend application server provide any sort of pushed-based messaging architecture support?I mean some different message-oriented middlewares that can be used for the push-based architecture or email support?There is a need in provision of the non web-based interface for certain users of the website who would get regular messages notifying them of different special offers in their field of interest(it should be push-based)

    Read the article

  • SPARC T4-4 Delivers World Record First Result on PeopleSoft Combined Benchmark

    - by Brian
    Oracle's SPARC T4-4 servers running Oracle's PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 combined online and batch benchmark achieved World Record 18,000 concurrent users while executing a PeopleSoft Payroll batch job of 500,000 employees in 43.32 minutes and maintaining online users response time at < 2 seconds. This world record is the first to run online and batch workloads concurrently. This result was obtained with a SPARC T4-4 server running Oracle Database 11g Release 2, a SPARC T4-4 server running PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 application server and a SPARC T4-2 server running Oracle WebLogic Server in the web tier. The SPARC T4-4 server running the application tier used Oracle Solaris Zones which provide a flexible, scalable and manageable virtualization environment. The average CPU utilization on the SPARC T4-2 server in the web tier was 17%, on the SPARC T4-4 server in the application tier it was 59%, and on the SPARC T4-4 server in the database tier was 35% (online and batch) leaving significant headroom for additional processing across the three tiers. The SPARC T4-4 server used for the database tier hosted Oracle Database 11g Release 2 using Oracle Automatic Storage Management (ASM) for database files management with I/O performance equivalent to raw devices. This is the first three tier mixed workload (online and batch) PeopleSoft benchmark also processing PeopleSoft payroll batch workload. Performance Landscape PeopleSoft HR Self-Service and Payroll Benchmark Systems Users Ave Response Search (sec) Ave Response Save (sec) Batch Time (min) Streams SPARC T4-2 (web) SPARC T4-4 (app) SPARC T4-2 (db) 18,000 0.944 0.503 43.32 64 Configuration Summary Application Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-4 server with 4 x SPARC T4 processors, 3.0 GHz 512 GB memory 5 x 300 GB SAS internal disks 1 x 100 GB and 2 x 300 GB internal SSDs 2 x 10 Gbe HBA Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 PeopleTools 8.52 PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 Oracle Tuxedo, Version 10.3.0.0, 64-bit, Patch Level 031 Java Platform, Standard Edition Development Kit 6 Update 32 Database Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-4 server with 4 x SPARC T4 processors, 3.0 GHz 256 GB memory 3 x 300 GB SAS internal disks Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Web Tier Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-2 server with 2 x SPARC T4 processors, 2.85 GHz 256 GB memory 2 x 300 GB SAS internal disks 1 x 100 GB internal SSD Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 PeopleTools 8.52 Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3.4 Java Platform, Standard Edition Development Kit 6 Update 32 Storage Configuration: 1 x Sun Server X2-4 as a COMSTAR head for data 4 x Intel Xeon X7550, 2.0 GHz 128 GB memory 1 x Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (80 flash modules) 1 x Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (40 flash modules) 1 x Sun Fire X4275 as a COMSTAR head for redo logs 12 x 2 TB SAS disks with Niwot Raid controller Benchmark Description This benchmark combines PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 HR Self Service online and PeopleSoft Payroll batch workloads to run on a unified database deployed on Oracle Database 11g Release 2. The PeopleSoft HRSS benchmark kit is a Oracle standard benchmark kit run by all platform vendors to measure the performance. It's an OLTP benchmark where DB SQLs are moderately complex. The results are certified by Oracle and a white paper is published. PeopleSoft HR SS defines a business transaction as a series of HTML pages that guide a user through a particular scenario. Users are defined as corporate Employees, Managers and HR administrators. The benchmark consist of 14 scenarios which emulate users performing typical HCM transactions such as viewing paycheck, promoting and hiring employees, updating employee profile and other typical HCM application transactions. All these transactions are well-defined in the PeopleSoft HR Self-Service 9.1 benchmark kit. This benchmark metric is the weighted average response search/save time for all the transactions. The PeopleSoft 9.1 Payroll (North America) benchmark demonstrates system performance for a range of processing volumes in a specific configuration. This workload represents large batch runs typical of a ERP environment during a mass update. The benchmark measures five application business process run times for a database representing large organization. They are Paysheet Creation, Payroll Calculation, Payroll Confirmation, Print Advice forms, and Create Direct Deposit File. The benchmark metric is the cumulative elapsed time taken to complete the Paysheet Creation, Payroll Calculation and Payroll Confirmation business application processes. The benchmark metrics are taken for each respective benchmark while running simultaneously on the same database back-end. Specifically, the payroll batch processes are started when the online workload reaches steady state (the maximum number of online users) and overlap with online transactions for the duration of the steady state. Key Points and Best Practices Two Oracle PeopleSoft Domain sets with 200 application servers each on a SPARC T4-4 server were hosted in 2 separate Oracle Solaris Zones to demonstrate consolidation of multiple application servers, ease of administration and performance tuning. Each Oracle Solaris Zone was bound to a separate processor set, each containing 15 cores (total 120 threads). The default set (1 core from first and third processor socket, total 16 threads) was used for network and disk interrupt handling. This was done to improve performance by reducing memory access latency by using the physical memory closest to the processors and offload I/O interrupt handling to default set threads, freeing up cpu resources for Application Servers threads and balancing application workload across 240 threads. See Also Oracle PeopleSoft Benchmark White Papers oracle.com SPARC T4-2 Server oracle.com OTN SPARC T4-4 Server oracle.com OTN PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Capital Management oracle.com OTN PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Capital Management (Payroll) oracle.com OTN Oracle Solaris oracle.com OTN Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition oracle.com OTN Disclosure Statement Oracle's PeopleSoft HR and Payroll combined benchmark, www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/apps-benchmark/peoplesoft-167486.html, results 09/30/2012.

    Read the article

  • Guest Blog: Secure your applications based on your business model, not your application architecture, by Yaldah Hakim

    - by Darin Pendergraft
    Today’s businesses are looking for new ways to engage their customers, embrace mobile applications, while staying in compliance, improving security and driving down costs.  For many, the solution to that problem is to host their applications with a Cloud Services provider, but concerns that a hosted application will be less secure continue to cause doubt. Oracle is recognized by Gartner as a leader in the User Provisioning and Identity and Access Governance magic quadrants, and has helped thousands of companies worldwide to secure their enterprise applications and identities.  Now those same world class IDM capabilities are available as a managed service, both for enterprise applications, as well has Oracle hosted applications. --- Listen to our IDM in the cloud podcast to hear Yvonne Wilson, Director of the IDM Practice in Cloud Service, explain how Oracle Managed Services provides IDM as a service ---Selecting OracleManaged Cloud Services to deploy and manage Oracle Identity Management Services is a smart business decision for a variety of reasons. Oracle hosted Identity Management infrastructure is deployed securely, resilient to failures, and supported by Oracle experts. In addition, Oracle  Managed Cloud Services monitors customer solutions from several perspectives to ensure they continue to work smoothly over time. Customers gain the benefit of Oracle Identity Management expertise to achieve predictable and effective results for their organization.Customers can select Oracle to host and manage any number of Oracle IDM products as a service as well as other Oracle’s security products, providing a flexible, cost effective alternative to onsite hardware and software costs.Security is a major concern for all organizations- making it increasingly important to partner with a company like Oracle to ensure consistency and a layered approach to security and compliance when selecting a cloud provider.  Oracle Cloud Service makes this possible for our customers by taking away the headache and complexity of managing Identity management infrastructure and other security solutions. For more information:http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/cloud/managed-cloud-services/overview/index.htmlTwitter-https://twitter.com/OracleCloudZoneFacebook - http://www.facebook.com/OracleCloudComputing

    Read the article

  • Architecture for Social Graph data that has a Time Frame Associated?

    - by Jay Stevens
    I am adding some "social" type features to an existing application. There are a limited # of node & edge types. Overall the data itself is relatively small (50,000 - 70,000 for each type of node) there will be a number of edges (relationships) between them (almost all directional). This, I know, is relatively easy to represent with an SDF store (such as BrightstarDB) or something like Microsoft's Trinity (or really many of the noSQL options). The thing that, I think, makes this a unique use case is that each relationship will have a timeframe associated with it (start and end dates). Right now, I'm thinking of just storing this in a relational structure and dealing with the headaches of "traversing the graph", but I'm looking for suggestions on a better approach (both in terms of data structure and server): Column ================ From_Node_ID Relationship To_Node_ID StartDate EndDate Any suggestions or thoughts are welcomed.

    Read the article

  • How do I install Cacti 8.7i with PIA 3.1(Plug In Architecture) for 12.04 Server LTS?

    - by Pininy
    I am planning to upgrade my current 9.04 server version to 12.04LTS server. I've successfully backup and restore my Cacti version 8.7d to 8.7i that comes with the distribution. However, the plugin patch installation for PIA 3.1 it is not working for only ubuntu. Can you assist? or it's there a way to include Cacti 8.8a which is a stable version which comes with PIA 3.1 preinstalled. regards, thomas

    Read the article

  • Architecture Standards &ndash; BPMN vs. BPEL for Business Process Management

    - by pat.shepherd
    I get asked often which business process standard an organization should use; BPMN or BPEL?  As I explain to folks, they both have strengths.  Here is a great article that helps understand the benefits of both and where to use them.  The good news is that, with Oracle SOA Suite and BPM suite, you have the option and flexibility to use both in the same SCA model and runtime container.  Good stuff. Here is the great article that Mark Nelson wrote: The right tool for the right job BPEL and BPMN are both ‘languages’ or ‘notations’ for describing and executing business processes. Both are open standards. Most business process engines will support one or the other of these languages. Oracle however has chosen to support both and treat them as equals. This means that you have the freedom to choose which language to use on a process by process basis. And you can freely mix and match, even within a single composite. (A composite is the deployment unit in an SCA environment.) So why support both? Well it turns out that BPEL is really well suited to modeling some kinds of processes and BPMN is really well suited to modeling other kinds of processes. Of course there is a pretty significant overlap where either will do a great job What BPM adds to SOA Suite | RedStack

    Read the article

  • Organization &amp; Architecture UNISA Studies &ndash; Chap 6

    - by MarkPearl
    Learning Outcomes Discuss the physical characteristics of magnetic disks Describe how data is organized and accessed on a magnetic disk Discuss the parameters that play a role in the performance of magnetic disks Describe different optical memory devices Magnetic Disk The way data is stored on and retried from magnetic disks Data is recorded on and later retrieved form the disk via a conducting coil named the head (in many systems there are two heads) The writ mechanism exploits the fact that electricity flowing through a coil produces a magnetic field. Electric pulses are sent to the write head, and the resulting magnetic patterns are recorded on the surface below with different patterns for positive and negative currents The physical characteristics of a magnetic disk   Summarize from book   The factors that play a role in the performance of a disk Seek time – the time it takes to position the head at the track Rotational delay / latency – the time it takes for the beginning of the sector to reach the head Access time – the sum of the seek time and rotational delay Transfer time – the time it takes to transfer data RAID The rate of improvement in secondary storage performance has been considerably less than the rate for processors and main memory. Thus secondary storage has become a bit of a bottleneck. RAID works on the concept that if one disk can be pushed so far, additional gains in performance are to be had by using multiple parallel components. Points to note about RAID… RAID is a set of physical disk drives viewed by the operating system as a single logical drive Data is distributed across the physical drives of an array in a scheme known as striping Redundant disk capacity is used to store parity information, which guarantees data recoverability in case of a disk failure (not supported by RAID 0 or RAID 1) Interesting to note that the increase in the number of drives, increases the probability of failure. To compensate for this decreased reliability RAID makes use of stored parity information that enables the recovery of data lost due to a disk failure.   The RAID scheme consists of 7 levels…   Category Level Description Disks Required Data Availability Large I/O Data Transfer Capacity Small I/O Request Rate Striping 0 Non Redundant N Lower than single disk Very high Very high for both read and write Mirroring 1 Mirrored 2N Higher than RAID 2 – 5 but lower than RAID 6 Higher than single disk Up to twice that of a signle disk for read Parallel Access 2 Redundant via Hamming Code N + m Much higher than single disk Highest of all listed alternatives Approximately twice that of a single disk Parallel Access 3 Bit interleaved parity N + 1 Much higher than single disk Highest of all listed alternatives Approximately twice that of a single disk Independent Access 4 Block interleaved parity N + 1 Much higher than single disk Similar to RAID 0 for read, significantly lower than single disk for write Similar to RAID 0 for read, significantly lower than single disk for write Independent Access 5 Block interleaved parity N + 1 Much higher than single disk Similar to RAID 0 for read, lower than single disk for write Similar to RAID 0 for read, generally  lower than single disk for write Independent Access 6 Block interleaved parity N + 2 Highest of all listed alternatives Similar to RAID 0 for read; lower than RAID 5 for write Similar to RAID 0 for read, significantly lower than RAID 5  for write   Read page 215 – 221 for detailed explanation on RAID levels Optical Memory There are a variety of optical-disk systems available. Read through the table on page 222 – 223 Some of the devices include… CD CD-ROM CD-R CD-RW DVD DVD-R DVD-RW Blue-Ray DVD Magnetic Tape Most modern systems use serial recording – data is lade out as a sequence of bits along each track. The typical recording used in serial is referred to as serpentine recording. In this technique when data is being recorded, the first set of bits is recorded along the whole length of the tape. When the end of the tape is reached the heads are repostioned to record a new track, and the tape is again recorded on its whole length, this time in the opposite direction. That process continued back and forth until the tape is full. To increase speed, the read-write head is capable of reading and writing a number of adjacent tracks simultaneously. Data is still recorded serially along individual tracks, but blocks in sequence are stored on adjacent tracks as suggested. A tape drive is a sequential access device. Magnetic tape was the first kind of secondary memory. It is still widely used as the lowest-cost, slowest speed member of the memory hierarchy.

    Read the article

  • What layer to introduce human readable error messages?

    - by MrLane
    One of the things that I have never been happy with on any project I have worked on over the years and have really not been able to resolve myself is exactly at what tier in an application should human readable error information be retrieved for display to a user. A common approach that has worked well has been to return strongly typed/concrete "result objects" from the methods on the public surface of the business tier/API. A method on the interface may be: public ClearUserAccountsResult ClearUserAccounts(ClearUserAccountsParam param); And the result class implementation: public class ClearUserAccountsResult : IResult { public readonly List<Account> ClearedAccounts{get; set;} public readonly bool Success {get; set;} // Implements IResult public readonly string Message{get; set;} // Implements IResult, human readable // Constructor implemented here to set readonly properties... } This works great when the API needs to be exposed over WCF as the result object can be serialized. Again this is only done on the public surface of the API/business tier. The error message can also be looked up from the database, which means it can be changed and localized. However, it has always been suspect to me, this idea of returning human readable information from the business tier like this, partly because what constitutes the public surface of the API may change over time...and it may be the case that the API will need to be reused by other API components in the future that do not need the human readable string messages (and looking them up from a database would be an expensive waste). I am thinking a better approach is to keep the business objects free from such result objects and keep them simple and then retrieve human readable error strings somewhere closer to the UI layer or only in the UI itself, but I have two problems here: 1) The UI may be a remote client (Winforms/WPF/Silverlight) or an ASP.NET web application hosted on another server. In these cases the UI will have to fetch the error strings from the server. 2) Often there are multiple legitimate modes of failure. If the business tier becomes so vague and generic in the way it returns errors there may not be enough information exposed publicly to tell what the error actually was: i.e: if a method has 3 modes of legitimate failure but returns a boolean to indicate failure, you cannot work out what the appropriate message to display to the user should be. I have thought about using failure enums as a substitute, they can indicate a specific error that can be tested for and coded against. This is sometimes useful within the business tier itself as a way of passing via method returns the specifics of a failure rather than just a boolean, but it is not so good for serialization scenarios. Is there a well worn pattern for this? What do people think? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do I cross-compile my application for Ubuntu 12.04 armhf architecture on a Ubuntu 12.04 i386 host?

    - by Jonathan Cave
    I have a large application I have written. I can successfully compile the application in the following scenarios: in a native compilation for the i386 host running Ubuntu 12.04 natively on a PandaBoard running Ubuntu 12.04 (this takes a long time) using Qemu and a chroot on the host PC for the armhf PandaBoard target (this takes a very long time) I would like to cross-compile the application on the i386 host to run on a target such as the PandaBoard to complete builds in a timely fashion. So far attempts made using the arm-linux-gnueabihf tool chain in the repositories has produced binaries that do not run correctly. At this stage, I have no plans to package the software. What is the recommended way to achieve a successful cross-compile?

    Read the article

  • How to model interentity membership in entity-component architecture?

    - by croxis
    I'm falling in love with simple grace of entity-component design, although I still have issues breaking from MVC and OOP practices. Some of my game entities have membership relationships with each other (ex: a player is a member of a city, a city is a member of a nation), and I am unsure on the best way to implement it. My initial reaction is to have a a MemberOfCity component that points to the appropriate city component, but components are suppose to have no references to each other. My other option is to have a System do it, but that would require the system to persist data outside of a component. Is there a clean way to do this in an entity-component design, or am I trying to use a hammer on a screw and should use a hybrid/another approach?

    Read the article

  • At which architecture level are you running BDD tests (e.g. Cucumber)

    - by Pete
    I have in the last year gotten quite fond of using SpecFlow (which is a .NET port of Cucumber) I have used it both to test a ASP.NET MVC application at the web layer, i.e. using browser automation, but also at the controller layer. The first gives me a higher confidence in the correctness of the application, because JavaScript is tested, and improper controller configuration is also caught. But those tests are slower to execute, and more complex to implement, than those just testing on the controller layer. My tests are full functional tests, i.e. they exercise all layers of the application, all the way down to the database. So the first thing before any scenario is that the database is cleared of data, allowing the test to assume that only data specified in the "Given" block exists. Then I see example on how to use it, where they test just exercise the model layer. So what are your experiences with these tools? Which layer of the application do you test?

    Read the article

  • Organization &amp; Architecture UNISA Studies &ndash; Chap 4

    - by MarkPearl
    Learning Outcomes Explain the characteristics of memory systems Describe the memory hierarchy Discuss cache memory principles Discuss issues relevant to cache design Describe the cache organization of the Pentium Computer Memory Systems There are key characteristics of memory… Location – internal or external Capacity – expressed in terms of bytes Unit of Transfer – the number of bits read out of or written into memory at a time Access Method – sequential, direct, random or associative From a users perspective the two most important characteristics of memory are… Capacity Performance – access time, memory cycle time, transfer rate The trade off for memory happens along three axis… Faster access time, greater cost per bit Greater capacity, smaller cost per bit Greater capacity, slower access time This leads to people using a tiered approach in their use of memory   As one goes down the hierarchy, the following occurs… Decreasing cost per bit Increasing capacity Increasing access time Decreasing frequency of access of the memory by the processor The use of two levels of memory to reduce average access time works in principle, but only if conditions 1 to 4 apply. A variety of technologies exist that allow us to accomplish this. Thus it is possible to organize data across the hierarchy such that the percentage of accesses to each successively lower level is substantially less than that of the level above. A portion of main memory can be used as a buffer to hold data temporarily that is to be read out to disk. This is sometimes referred to as a disk cache and improves performance in two ways… Disk writes are clustered. Instead of many small transfers of data, we have a few large transfers of data. This improves disk performance and minimizes processor involvement. Some data designed for write-out may be referenced by a program before the next dump to disk. In that case the data is retrieved rapidly from the software cache rather than slowly from disk. Cache Memory Principles Cache memory is substantially faster than main memory. A caching system works as follows.. When a processor attempts to read a word of memory, a check is made to see if this in in cache memory… If it is, the data is supplied, If it is not in the cache, a block of main memory, consisting of a fixed number of words is loaded to the cache. Because of the phenomenon of locality of references, when a block of data is fetched into the cache, it is likely that there will be future references to that same memory location or to other words in the block. Elements of Cache Design While there are a large number of cache implementations, there are a few basic design elements that serve to classify and differentiate cache architectures… Cache Addresses Cache Size Mapping Function Replacement Algorithm Write Policy Line Size Number of Caches Cache Addresses Almost all non-embedded processors support virtual memory. Virtual memory in essence allows a program to address memory from a logical point of view without needing to worry about the amount of physical memory available. When virtual addresses are used the designer may choose to place the cache between the MMU (memory management unit) and the processor or between the MMU and main memory. The disadvantage of virtual memory is that most virtual memory systems supply each application with the same virtual memory address space (each application sees virtual memory starting at memory address 0), which means the cache memory must be completely flushed with each application context switch or extra bits must be added to each line of the cache to identify which virtual address space the address refers to. Cache Size We would like the size of the cache to be small enough so that the overall average cost per bit is close to that of main memory alone and large enough so that the overall average access time is close to that of the cache alone. Also, larger caches are slightly slower than smaller ones. Mapping Function Because there are fewer cache lines than main memory blocks, an algorithm is needed for mapping main memory blocks into cache lines. The choice of mapping function dictates how the cache is organized. Three techniques can be used… Direct – simplest technique, maps each block of main memory into only one possible cache line Associative – Each main memory block to be loaded into any line of the cache Set Associative – exhibits the strengths of both the direct and associative approaches while reducing their disadvantages For detailed explanations of each approach – read the text book (page 148 – 154) Replacement Algorithm For associative and set associating mapping a replacement algorithm is needed to determine which of the existing blocks in the cache must be replaced by a new block. There are four common approaches… LRU (Least recently used) FIFO (First in first out) LFU (Least frequently used) Random selection Write Policy When a block resident in the cache is to be replaced, there are two cases to consider If no writes to that block have happened in the cache – discard it If a write has occurred, a process needs to be initiated where the changes in the cache are propagated back to the main memory. There are several approaches to achieve this including… Write Through – all writes to the cache are done to the main memory as well at the point of the change Write Back – when a block is replaced, all dirty bits are written back to main memory The problem is complicated when we have multiple caches, there are techniques to accommodate for this but I have not summarized them. Line Size When a block of data is retrieved and placed in the cache, not only the desired word but also some number of adjacent words are retrieved. As the block size increases from very small to larger sizes, the hit ratio will at first increase because of the principle of locality, which states that the data in the vicinity of a referenced word are likely to be referenced in the near future. As the block size increases, more useful data are brought into cache. The hit ratio will begin to decrease as the block becomes even bigger and the probability of using the newly fetched information becomes less than the probability of using the newly fetched information that has to be replaced. Two specific effects come into play… Larger blocks reduce the number of blocks that fit into a cache. Because each block fetch overwrites older cache contents, a small number of blocks results in data being overwritten shortly after they are fetched. As a block becomes larger, each additional word is farther from the requested word and therefore less likely to be needed in the near future. The relationship between block size and hit ratio is complex, and no set approach is judged to be the best in all circumstances.   Pentium 4 and ARM cache organizations The processor core consists of four major components: Fetch/decode unit – fetches program instruction in order from the L2 cache, decodes these into a series of micro-operations, and stores the results in the L2 instruction cache Out-of-order execution logic – Schedules execution of the micro-operations subject to data dependencies and resource availability – thus micro-operations may be scheduled for execution in a different order than they were fetched from the instruction stream. As time permits, this unit schedules speculative execution of micro-operations that may be required in the future Execution units – These units execute micro-operations, fetching the required data from the L1 data cache and temporarily storing results in registers Memory subsystem – This unit includes the L2 and L3 caches and the system bus, which is used to access main memory when the L1 and L2 caches have a cache miss and to access the system I/O resources

    Read the article

  • If most of team can't follow the architecture, what do you do?

    - by Chris
    Hi all, I'm working on a greenfields project with two other developers. We're all contractors, and myself and one other just started working on the project while the orginal one has been doing most of the basic framework coding. In the past month, my fellow programmer and I have been just frustrated by the design descisions done by our co-worker. Here's a little background information: The application at face value appeared to be your standard n-layered web application using C# on the 3.5 framework. We have a data layer, business layer and a web interface. But as we got deeper into the project we found some very interesting things that have caused us some troubles. There is a custom data access sqlHelper type base which only accepts dictionary key/valued entries and returns only data tables. There are no entity objects, but there are some massive objects which do everything and then are tossed into session for persitance. The general idea is that the pages (.aspx) don't do anything, while the controls (.ascx) do everything. The general flow is that a client clicks on a button, which goes to a user control base which passes a process request to the 'BLL' class which goes to the page processor, which then goes to a getControlProcessor, which at last actually processes the request. The request itself is made up of a dictionary which is passing a string valued method name, stored procedure name, a control name and possibly a value. All switching of the processing is done by comparing the string values of the control names and method names. Pages are linked together via a common header control that uses a combination of javascript and tables to create a hyperlink effect. And as I found out yesterday, a simple hyperlink between one page and another does not work because of the need to have quite a bit of information in session to determine which control to display on a page. My fellow programmer and I both believe that this is a strange and uncommon approach to web application development. Both of us have been in this business for over five years and neither of us have seen this approach. My question is this, how would we approach our co-worker and voice our concerns and what should we do if he does not want to accept the criteic? We both do not want to insult the work that has been done, but feel that going forward will create a nightmare for development. Thanks for your comments.

    Read the article

  • Is there any kind of established architecture for browser based MMO games?

    - by black_puppydog
    I am beginning the development of a broser based game in which players take certain actions at any point in time. Big parts of gameplay will be happening in real life and just have to be entered into the system. I believe a good kind of comparison might be a platform for managing fantasy football, although I have virtually no experience playing that, so please correct me if I am mistaken here. The point is that some events happen in the program (i.e. on the server, out of reach for the players) like pulling new results from some datasource, starting of a new round by a game master and such. Other events happen in real life (two players closing a deal on the transfer of some team member or whatnot - again: have never played fantasy football) and have to be entered into the system. The first part is pretty easy since the game masters will be "staff" and thus can be trusted to a certain degree to not mess with the system. But the second part bothers me quite a lot, especially since the actions may involve multiple steps and interactions with different players, like registering a deal with the system that then has to be approved by the other party or denied and passed on to a game master to decide. I would of course like to separate the game logic as far as possible from the presentation and basic form validation but am unsure how to do this in a clean fashion. Of course I could (and will) put some effort into making my own architectural decisions and prototype different ideas. But I am bound to make some stupid mistakes at some point, so I would like to avoid some of that by getting a little "book smart" beforehand. So the question is: Is there any kind of architectural works that I can read up on? Papers, blogs, maybe design documents or even source code? Writing this down this seems more like a business application with business rules, workflows and such... Any good entry points for that?

    Read the article

  • In choosing a service-oriented architecture framework that needs to work with .NET and with Java, what to look for?

    - by cm007
    I planning to write an application in which there will be a service (call it A) listening for particular commands. This service will then relay those commands to other services (call them B and C) which are written, respectively, in .NET and Java (service A chooses which of service B or C to which to relay depending on the contents of the request to service A). I am looking for a framework that will allow for interoperability with both .NET and with Java, for example WCF or JAX-WS, or writing a custom framework (e.g., JSON REST commands over HTTP, similar to http://code.google.com/p/selenium/wiki/JsonWireProtocol). What questions/aspects should I consider in deciding?

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture: How to divide work to a network of computers?

    - by Morpork
    Imagine a scenario as follows: Lets say you have a central computer which generates a lot of data. This data must go through some processing, which unfortunately takes longer than to generate. In order for the processing to catch up with real time, we plug in more slave computers. Further, we must take into account the possibility of slaves dropping out of the network mid-job as well as additional slaves being added. The central computer should ensure that all jobs are finished to its satisfaction, and that jobs dropped by a slave are retasked to another. The main question is: What approach should I use to achieve this? But perhaps the following would help me arrive at an answer: Is there a name or design pattern to what I am trying to do? What domain of knowledge do I need to achieve the goal of getting these computers to talk to each other? (eg. will a database, which I have some knowledge of, be enough or will this involve sockets, which I have yet to have knowledge of?) Are there any examples of such a system? The main question is a bit general so it would be good to have a starting point/reference point. Note I am assuming constraints of c++ and windows so solutions pointing in that direction would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • MMORPG Server architecture: How to handle player input (messages/packets) while the server has to update many other things at the same time?

    - by Renann
    Yes, the question is is very difficult. This is more or less like what I'm thinking up to now: while(true) { if (hasMessage) { handleTheMessage(); } } But while I'm receiving the player's input, I also have objects that need to be updated or, of course, monsters walking (which need to have their locations updated on the game client everytime), among other things. What should I do? Make a thread to handle things that can't be stopped no matter what? Code an "else" in the infinity loop where I update the other things when I don't have player's input to handle? Or even: should I only update the things that at least one player can see? These are just suggestions... I'm really confused about it. If there's a book that covers these things, I'd like to know. It's not that important, but I'm using the Lidgren lib, C# and XNA to code both server and client. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • XSLT transformation by grouping based on 3 elements/attributes

    - by Daniel
    This question is related to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2863202/xslt-1-0-grouping-to-reformat-element-defined-by-date-into-element-defined-by-tas Just to understand more clearly the trick behind. How would the XSLT look like if we were to group by date, task and shift as below: Input XML; <Person> <name>John</name> <date>June12</date> <shift tier=1> <workTime taskID=1>34</workTime> <workTime taskID=2>12</workTime> </shift> <shift tier=2> <workTime taskID=1>3</workTime> </shift> </Person> <Person> <name>John</name> <date>June13</date> <shift tier=1> <workTime taskID=1>21</workTime> <workTime taskID=2>11</workTime> </shift> <shift tier=2> <workTime taskID=1>2</workTime> </shift> </Person> and similarly, the output would be <Person> <name>John</name> <tier>1</tier> <taskID>1</taskID> <workTime> <date>June12</date> <time>34</time> </worTime> <workTime> <date>June13</date> <time>21</time> </worTime> </Person> <Person> <name>John</name> <tier>1</tier> <taskID>2</taskID> <workTime> <date>June12</date> <time>12</time> </worTime> <workTime> <date>June13</date> <time>11</time> </worTime> </Person> <Person> <name>John</name> <tier>2</tier> <taskID>1</taskID> <workTime> <date>June12</date> <time>3</time> </worTime> <workTime> <date>June13</date> <time>2</time> </worTime> </Person>

    Read the article

  • Server and Application architecture for large outgoing email volume.

    - by Ezequiel
    Hi, we need to develop an application to send large amount of emails (newsletters) We estimate 15 millions of emails per month (6 - 10 emails per seconds). Would you recommend me the proper architecture for this application? should we have several MTA agents and use them in a round robin fashion? What considerations should we take on account to not being treated as spammers (its really not spam what we are going to send). Thanks for your help. Ezequiel

    Read the article

  • What programming languages do the top tier Universities teach?

    - by Simucal
    I'm constantly being inundated with articles and people talking about how most of today's Universities are nothing more than Java vocational schools churning out mediocre programmer after mediocre programmer. Our very own Joel Spolsky has his famous article, "The Perils of Java Schools." Similarly, Alan Kay, a famous Computer Scientist (and SO member) has said this in the past: "I fear — as far as I can tell — that most undergraduate degrees in computer science these days are basically Java vocational training." - Alan Kay (link) If the languages being taught by the schools are considered such a contributing factor to the quality of the school's program then I'm curious what languages do the "top-tier" computer science schools teach (MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Stanford, etc)? If the average school is performing so poorly due in large part the languages (or lack of) that they teach then what languages do the supposed "good" cs programs teach that differentiate them? If you can, provide the name of the school you attended, followed by a list of the languages they use throughout their coursework. Edit: Shog-9 asks why I don't get this information directly from the schools websites themselves. I would, but many schools websites don't discuss the languages they use in their class descriptions. Quite a few will say, "using high-level languages we will...", without elaborating on which languages they use. So, we should be able to get a pretty accurate list of languages taught at various well known institutions from the various SO members who have attended at them.

    Read the article

  • Current SPARC Architectures

    - by Darryl Gove
    Different generations of SPARC processors implement different architectures. The architecture that the compiler targets is controlled implicitly by the -xtarget flag and explicitly by the -arch flag. If an application targets a recent architecture, then the compiler gets to play with all the instructions that the new architecture provides. The downside is that the application won't work on older processors that don't have the new instructions. So for developer's there is a trade-off between performance and portability. The way we have solved this in the compiler is to assume a "generic" architecture, and we've made this the default behaviour of the compiler. The only flag that doesn't make this assumption is -fast which tells the compiler to assume that the build machine is also the deployment machine - so the compiler can use all the instructions that the build machine provides. The -xtarget=generic flag tells the compiler explicitly to use this generic model. We work hard on making generic code work well across all processors. So in most cases this is a very good choice. It is also of interest to know what processors support the various architectures. The following Venn diagram attempts to show this: A textual description is as follows: The T1 and T2 processors, in addition to most other SPARC processors that were shipped in the last 10+ years supported V9b, or sparcvis2. The SPARC64 processors from Fujitsu, used in the M-series machines, added support for the floating point multiply accumulate instruction in the sparcfmaf architecture. Support for this instruction also appeared in the T3 - this is called sparcvis3 Later SPARC64 processors added the integer multiply accumulate instruction, this architecture is sparcima. Finally the T4 includes support for both the integer and floating point multiply accumulate instructions in the sparc4 architecture. So the conclusion should be: Floating point multiply accumulate is supported in both the T-series and M-series machines, so it should be a relatively safe bet to start using it. The T4 is a very good machine to deploy to because it supports all the current instruction sets.

    Read the article

  • Windows Azure Use Case: Hybrid Applications

    - by BuckWoody
    This is one in a series of posts on when and where to use a distributed architecture design in your organization's computing needs. You can find the main post here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2011/01/18/windows-azure-and-sql-azure-use-cases.aspx  Description: Organizations see the need for computing infrastructures that they can “rent” or pay for only when they need them. They also understand the benefits of distributed computing, but do not want to create this infrastructure themselves. However, they may have considerations that prevent them from moving all of their current IT investment to a distributed environment: Private data (do not want to send or store sensitive data off-site) High dollar investment in current infrastructure Applications currently running well, but may need additional periodic capacity Current applications not designed in a stateless fashion In these situations, a “hybrid” approach works best. In fact, with Windows Azure, a hybrid approach is an optimal way to implement distributed computing even when the stipulations above do not apply. Keeping a majority of the computing function in an organization local while exploring and expanding that footprint into Windows and SQL Azure is a good migration or expansion strategy. A “hybrid” architecture merely means that part of a computing cycle is shared between two architectures. For instance, some level of computing might be done in a Windows Azure web-based application, while the data is stored locally at the organization. Implementation: There are multiple methods for implementing a hybrid architecture, in a spectrum from very little interaction from the local infrastructure to Windows or SQL Azure. The patterns fall into two broad schemas, and even these can be mixed. 1. Client-Centric Hybrid Patterns In this pattern, programs are coded such that the client system sends queries or compute requests to multiple systems. The “client” in this case might be a web-based codeset actually stored on another system (which acts as a client, the user’s device serving as the presentation layer) or a compiled program. In either case, the code on the client requestor carries the burden of defining the layout of the requests. While this pattern is often the easiest to code, it’s the most brittle. Any change in the architecture must be reflected on each client, but this can be mitigated by using a centralized system as the client such as in the web scenario. 2. System-Centric Hybrid Patterns Another approach is to create a distributed architecture by turning on-site systems into “services” that can be called from Windows Azure using the service Bus or the Access Control Services (ACS) capabilities. Code calls from a series of in-process client application. In this pattern you move the “client” interface into the server application logic. If you do not wish to change the application itself, you can “layer” the results of the code return using a product (such as Microsoft BizTalk) that exposes a Web Services Definition Language (WSDL) endpoint to Windows Azure using the Application Fabric. In effect, this is similar to creating a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) environment, and has the advantage of de-coupling your computing architecture. If each system offers a “service” of the results of some software processing, the operating system or platform becomes immaterial, assuming it adheres to a service contract. There are important considerations when you federate a system, whether to Windows or SQL Azure or any other distributed architecture. While these considerations are consistent with coding any application for distributed computing, they are especially important for a hybrid application. Connection resiliency - Applications on-premise normally have low-latency and good connection properties, something you’re not always guaranteed in a distributed and hybrid application. Whether a centralized client or a distributed one, the code should be able to handle extended retry logic. Authorization and Access - In a single authorization environment like a Active Directory domain, security is handled at a user-password level. In a distributed computing environment, you have more options. You can mitigate this with  using The Windows Azure Application Fabric feature of ACS to make the Azure application aware of the App Fabric as an ADFS provider. However, a claims-based authentication structure is often a superior choice.  Consistency and Concurrency - When you have a Relational Database Management System (RDBMS), Consistency and Concurrency are part of the design. In a Service Architecture, you need to plan for sequential message handling and lifecycle. Resources: How to Build a Hybrid On-Premise/In Cloud Application: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ignitionshowcase/archive/2010/11/09/how-to-build-a-hybrid-on-premise-in-cloud-application.aspx  General Architecture guidance: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2010/12/21/windows-azure-learning-plan-architecture.aspx   

    Read the article

  • Which web Tier Framework for a public commercial website with heavy load ?

    - by Maxime ARNSTAMM
    Hello everyone, As a part of an enterprise architecture exercise, i need to find a java-based framework filling these constraints : heavy (i think) load : 5000 concurrent connections widely known : can't be too exotic, the contractors would be too high priced. relatively easy to use : developpement time must be reasonnable must be as compliant as possible with the css/html layout produced by a designer Must look like "web 2.0" from the marketing point of view. What i learned from my limited experience is : jsf : 1, don't know. 2, 3 ok. 4 not ok (at least not without huge effort) wicket : 1, not really. 2, 3 and 4 ok. gwt : 1, don't know. 2, 3 ok. 4 not ok (but more ok than jsf) others : not really "web 2.0" or not really known I'm really junior, so my ideas about those frameworks are probably wrong, that's why i come to you, stackoverflowees. Thanks for helping :)

    Read the article

  • What are best practices on virtual lab/test bed architecture?

    - by WooYek
    I am currently preparing a new small virtual environment for development and testing with Windows Server + SQL Server + AD + Sharepoint + Exchange + IIS(ASP.NET) + Biztalk + ?, for a small (up to 5) dev team. What are pros and cons on different approaches, eg. splitting up over different machines or packing everything up per machine. I your experience what are the best practices I should follow in terms of architecture and various system/servers placement. What to share and what to split per person. I would like to achieve some flexibility for the dev and testing process (so teammebers would not be steeping on each other's toes) and limit administrative effort needed to propagate settings, integrate work items and revert changes when something breaks up. It's not supposed to be an everyday development working environment, more a tier 2 developer testing environment, and not yet an integration or QA testing environment with formal change process. IMO the two borderline solutions are: creating one all-inclusive machine for each dev team member giving them freedom to manage creating shared environment managed by the one with somehow formalized change request process What golden mean would you recommend, and why?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83  | Next Page >