Search Results

Search found 13526 results on 542 pages for 'distributed objects'.

Page 88/542 | < Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95  | Next Page >

  • How can a collection class instantiate many objects with one database call?

    - by Buttle Butkus
    I have a baseClass where I do not want public setters. I have a load($id) method that will retrieve the data for that object from the db. I have been using static class methods like getBy($property,$values) to return multiple class objects using a single database call. But some people say that static methods are not OOP. So now I'm trying to create a baseClassCollection that can do the same thing. But it can't, because it cannot access protected setters. I don't want everyone to be able to set the object's data. But it seems that it is an all-or-nothing proposition. I cannot give just the collection class access to the setters. I've seen a solution using debug_backtrace() but that seems inelegant. I'm moving toward just making the setters public. Are there any other solutions? Or should I even be looking for other solutions?

    Read the article

  • In C++, is it a reflection of poor software design if objects are deleted manually?

    - by grokus
    With the advent of smart pointers, is it a sign of poor design if I see objects are deleted? I'm seeing some software components in our product that people are still doing this. This practice strikes me as un-idiomatic, but I need to be sure this is the industry consensus. I'm not starting a crusade but it'd be nice to be prepared theory wise. Edit: legit uses of delete, Klaim mentioned the object pool use case. I agree. Bad examples of using delete, I am seeing many new's in constructor or start() and corresponding delete's in the destructor or stop(), why not use scoped_ptr? It makes the code cleaner.

    Read the article

  • What are the benefits of Android way of "saving memory" - explicitly passing Context objects everywhere?

    - by Sarge Borsch
    Turned out, this question is not easy to formulate for me, but let's try. In Android, pretty much any UI object depends on a Context, and has defined lifetime. It also can destroy and recreate UI objects and even whole application process at any time, and so on. This makes coding asynchronous operations correctly not straightforward. (and sometimes very cumbersome) But I never have seen a real explanation, why it's done that way? There are other OSes, including mobile OSes (iOS, for example), that don't do such things. So, what are the wins of Android way (Activities & Contexts)? Does that allow Android applications to use much less RAM, or maybe there are other benefits?

    Read the article

  • Using static methods in objects PHP - is it advantage?

    - by RePRO
    I was reading some articles and discussions on the use of static methods on objects and it struck me how much the views differ. Someone say that using static methods is an advantage. Someone says that use is a big mistake. I wonder how is it? My question is when to use static methods and when not? I would like to hear answers from experts in this field (PHP OOP). This is because I know how it really is. The following code should be analogous. Just call the static method is simpler (my opinion): <?php class A { public function write($a) { echo $a; } } class B { public static function write($a) { echo $a; } } $a = new A; $a->write(5); // 5 B::write(5); // 5 ?> Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How do you handle domain logic that spans multiple model objects in an ORM?

    - by duality_
    So I know that business logic should be placed in the model. But using an ORM it is not as clear where I should place code that handles multiple objects. E.g. let's say we have a Customer model which has a type of either sporty or posh and we wanted to customer.add_bonus() to every posh customer. Where would we do this? Do we create a new class to handle all this? If yes, where do we put it (alongside all the other model classes, but not subclass it from the ORM?)? I'm currently using django framework in python, so specific suggestions are even more wanted.

    Read the article

  • what's the overhead when allocating objects/arrays in Java?

    - by Gnijuohz
    How many bytes an array occupies in Java? Assume It's a 64bit machine and also assume there are N elements in an array, so all these elements would take up 2*N, 4*N or 8*N bytes for different types of array. And a lecture in Coursera says that it would occupy 2*N+24, 4*N+24 or 8*N+24 bytes for a N element array and the 24 byte is called overhead, but didn't explain it. Also objects have overheads, which is 16 bytes. What exactly are these overheads? Also, do these overheads only exist in Java? How about C, C++ and Python?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to procedurally place objects in a non-gridded game?

    - by nickbadal
    I'd like to implement procedural world generation, but I don't want it to look gridded or blocky, where everything is obviously placed on an integer grid. I know that you can do this in gridded worlds by inputting a square's x and y into a noise function, or similar, but is it possible to generate a more natural looking object placement using procedural methods? This is in the context of an adventure game, if it matters. Edit: I guess I should have been a bit more clear in my original question, but I'm mostly wondering about the actual placement of objects in game, e.g. trees, buildings.

    Read the article

  • How do I swap two objects in a GC language without triggering GC?

    - by TenFour04
    I have two array lists. that I want to swap each frame. My question is, does the variable 'temp' need to be a member variable to avoid triggering GC, assuming this method is called on dozens of objects each frame? I'm not creating a new object, just a new reference to an object. public void LateUpdate(){ ArrayList<int> temp = previousFrameCollisions; previousFrameCollisions = currentFrameCollisions; currentFrameCollisions = temp; currentFrameCollisions.clear(); } I've been told there's no reason to make a primitive into a member variable just to avoid GC, so my best guess is that this also applies to object references.

    Read the article

  • What is the primary use of Vertex Buffer Objects?

    - by sensae
    From what I've read, it seems VBOs are purely for performance. I'm working on a very rudimentary learning project in lwjgl and I'm just trying to figure out what more advanced features of the library I should be delving into, and what their use is. My understanding is that VBOs allow a person to keep vertexes in VRAM while they aren't currently being drawn in a scene. In my case, I'm just drawing quads and performance probably isn't a concern at all, but I'm trying to piece together what's happening under the hood. If I'm drawing quads directly, I'm drawing from the CPU memory, correct? Also, if I'm not doing any checks for visibility, does that mean I'm rendering absolutely everything in the "scene", regardless of whether its in view? Are VBOs a way to store objects and only render what's needed?

    Read the article

  • How do I swap two objects in C# (specifically Mono) without triggering GC?

    - by TenFour04
    I have two array lists. that I want to swap each frame. My question is, does the variable 'temp' need to be a member variable to avoid triggering GC, assuming this method is called on dozens of objects each frame? I'm not creating a new object, just a new reference to an object. public void LateUpdate(){ ArrayList<int> temp = previousFrameCollisions; previousFrameCollisions = currentFrameCollisions; currentFrameCollisions = temp; currentFrameCollisions.clear(); } I've been told there's no reason to make a primitive into a member variable just to avoid GC, so my best guess is that this also applies to object references.

    Read the article

  • Difficult to replicate objects (object Customer) on the list? [migrated]

    - by gandolf
    I wrote a program that does work with files like delete and update, store, and search And all customers But I have a problem with the method is LoadAll Once the data are read from the file and then Deserialize the object becomes But when I want to save the list of objects in the list are repeated. How can I prevent the duplication in this code? var customerStr = File.ReadAllLines (address); The code is written in CustomerDataAccess class DataAccess Layer. Project File The main problem with the method LoadAll Code: public ICollection<Customer> LoadAll() { var alldata = File.ReadAllLines(address); List<Customer> lst = new List<Customer>(); foreach (var s in alldata) { var objCustomer = customerSerializer.Deserialize(s); lst.Add(objCustomer); } return lst; }

    Read the article

  • django username in url, instead of id

    - by dana
    Hello, in a mini virtual community, i have a profile_view function, so that i can view the profile of any registered user. The profile view function has as a parameter the id of the user wich the profile belongs to, so that when i want to access the profile of user 2 for example, i call it like that: http://127.0.0.1:8000/accounts/profile_view/2/ My problem is that i would like to have the username in the url, and NOT the id. I try to modify my code as follows, but it doesn't work still. Here is my code: view: def profile_view(request, user): u = User.objects.get(pk=user) up = UserProfile.objects.get(created_by = u) cv = UserProfile.objects.filter(created_by = User.objects.get(pk=user)) blog = New.objects.filter(created_by = u) replies = Reply.objects.filter(reply_to = blog) vote = Vote.objects.filter(voted=blog) following = Relations.objects.filter(initiated_by = u) follower = Relations.objects.filter(follow = u) return render_to_response('profile/publicProfile.html', { 'vote': vote, 'u':u, 'up':up, 'cv': cv, 'ing': following.order_by('-date_initiated'), 'er': follower.order_by('-date_follow'), 'list':blog.order_by('-date'), 'replies':replies }, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) and my url: urlpatterns = patterns('', url(r'^profile_view/(?P<user>\d+)/$', profile_view, name='profile_view'), thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Should I expose IObservable<T> on my interfaces?

    - by Alex
    My colleague and I have dispute. We are writing a .NET application that processes massive amounts of data. It receives data elements, groups subsets of them into blocks according to some criterion and processes those blocks. Let's say we have data items of type Foo arriving some source (from the network, for example) one by one. We wish to gather subsets of related objects of type Foo, construct an object of type Bar from each such subset and process objects of type Bar. One of us suggested the following design. Its main theme is exposing IObservable objects directly from the interfaces of our components. // ********* Interfaces ********** interface IFooSource { // this is the event-stream of objects of type Foo IObservable<Foo> FooArrivals { get; } } interface IBarSource { // this is the event-stream of objects of type Bar IObservable<Bar> BarArrivals { get; } } / ********* Implementations ********* class FooSource : IFooSource { // Here we put logic that receives Foo objects from the network and publishes them to the FooArrivals event stream. } class FooSubsetsToBarConverter : IBarSource { IFooSource fooSource; IObservable<Bar> BarArrivals { get { // Do some fancy Rx operators on fooSource.FooArrivals, like Buffer, Window, Join and others and return IObservable<Bar> } } } // this class will subscribe to the bar source and do processing class BarsProcessor { BarsProcessor(IBarSource barSource); void Subscribe(); } // ******************* Main ************************ class Program { public static void Main(string[] args) { var fooSource = FooSourceFactory.Create(); var barsProcessor = BarsProcessorFactory.Create(fooSource) // this will create FooSubsetToBarConverter and BarsProcessor barsProcessor.Subscribe(); fooSource.Run(); // this enters a loop of listening for Foo objects from the network and notifying about their arrival. } } The other suggested another design that its main theme is using our own publisher/subscriber interfaces and using Rx inside the implementations only when needed. //********** interfaces ********* interface IPublisher<T> { void Subscribe(ISubscriber<T> subscriber); } interface ISubscriber<T> { Action<T> Callback { get; } } //********** implementations ********* class FooSource : IPublisher<Foo> { public void Subscribe(ISubscriber<Foo> subscriber) { /* ... */ } // here we put logic that receives Foo objects from some source (the network?) publishes them to the registered subscribers } class FooSubsetsToBarConverter : ISubscriber<Foo>, IPublisher<Bar> { void Callback(Foo foo) { // here we put logic that aggregates Foo objects and publishes Bars when we have received a subset of Foos that match our criteria // maybe we use Rx here internally. } public void Subscribe(ISubscriber<Bar> subscriber) { /* ... */ } } class BarsProcessor : ISubscriber<Bar> { void Callback(Bar bar) { // here we put code that processes Bar objects } } //********** program ********* class Program { public static void Main(string[] args) { var fooSource = fooSourceFactory.Create(); var barsProcessor = barsProcessorFactory.Create(fooSource) // this will create BarsProcessor and perform all the necessary subscriptions fooSource.Run(); // this enters a loop of listening for Foo objects from the network and notifying about their arrival. } } Which one do you think is better? Exposing IObservable and making our components create new event streams from Rx operators, or defining our own publisher/subscriber interfaces and using Rx internally if needed? Here are some things to consider about the designs: In the first design the consumer of our interfaces has the whole power of Rx at his/her fingertips and can perform any Rx operators. One of us claims this is an advantage and the other claims that this is a drawback. The second design allows us to use any publisher/subscriber architecture under the hood. The first design ties us to Rx. If we wish to use the power of Rx, it requires more work in the second design because we need to translate the custom publisher/subscriber implementation to Rx and back. It requires writing glue code for every class that wishes to do some event processing.

    Read the article

  • Return 0 where django quersyet is none

    - by gramware
    I have a django queryset in my views whose values I pack before passing to my template. There is a problem when the queryset returns none since associated values are not unpacked. the quersyet is called comments. Here is my views.py def forums(request ): post_list = list(forum.objects.filter(child='0')&forum.objects.filter(deleted='0').order_by('postDate')) user = UserProfile.objects.get(pk=request.session['_auth_user_id']) newpostform = PostForm(request.POST) deletepostform = PostDeleteForm(request.POST) DelPostFormSet = modelformset_factory(forum, exclude=('child','postSubject','postBody','postPoster','postDate','childParentId')) readform = ReadForumForm(request.POST) comments =list( forum.objects.filter(deleted='0').filter(child='1').order_by('childParentId').values('childParentId').annotate(y=Count('childParentId'))) if request.user.is_staff== True : staff = 1 else: staff = 0 staffis = 1 if newpostform.is_valid(): topic = request.POST['postSubject'] poster = request.POST['postPoster'] newpostform.save() return HttpResponseRedirect('/forums') else: newpostform = PostForm(initial = {'postPoster':user.id}) if request.GET: form = SearchForm(request.GET) if form.is_valid(): query = form.cleaned_data['query'] post_list = list((forum.objects.filter(child='0')&forum.objects.filter(deleted='0')&forum.objects.filter(Q(postSubject__icontains=query)|Q(postBody__icontains=query)|Q(postDate__icontains=query)))or(forum.objects.filter(deleted='0')&forum.objects.filter(Q(postSubject__icontains=query)|Q(postBody__icontains=query)|Q(postDate__icontains=query)).values('childParentId'))) if request.method == 'POST': delpostformset = DelPostFormSet(request.POST) if delpostformset.is_valid(): delpostformset.save() return HttpResponseRedirect('/forums') else: delpostformset = DelPostFormSet(queryset=forum.objects.filter(child='0', deleted='0')) """if readform.is_valid(): user=get_object_or_404(UserProfile.objects.all()) readform.save() else: readform = ReadForumForm()""" post= zip( post_list,comments, delpostformset.forms) paginator = Paginator(post, 10) # Show 10 contacts per page # Make sure page request is an int. If not, deliver first page. try: page = int(request.GET.get('page', '1')) except ValueError: page = 1 # If page request (9999) is out of range, deliver last page of results. try: post = paginator.page(page) except (EmptyPage, InvalidPage): post = paginator.page(paginator.num_pages) return render_to_response('forum.html', {'post':post, 'newpostform': newpostform,'delpost':delpostformset, 'username':user.username, 'comments':comments, 'user':user, },context_instance = RequestContext( request ))

    Read the article

  • LinQ optimization

    - by Budda
    Here is a peace of code: void MyFunc(List<MyObj> objects) { MyFunc1(objects); foreach( MyObj obj in objects.Where(obj1=>obj1.Good)) { // Do Action With Good Object } } void MyFunc1(List<MyObj> objects) { int iGoodCount = objects.Where(obj1=>obj1.Good).Count(); BeHappy(iGoodCount); // do other stuff with 'objects' collection } Here we see that collection is analyzed twice and each time the value of 'Good' property is checked for each member: 1st time when calculating count of good objects, 2nd - when iterating through all good objects. It is desirable to have that optimized, and here is a straightforward solution: before call to MyFunc1 makecreate an additional temporary collection of good objects only (goodObjects, it can be IEnumerable); get count of these objects and pass it as an additional parameter to MyFunc1; in the 'MyFunc' method iterate not through 'objects.Where(...)' but through the 'goodObjects' collection. Not too bad approach (as far as I see), but additional parameter is required to be passed. Question: is there any LinQ out-of-the-box functionality that allows any caching during 1st Where().Count(), remembering a processed collection and use it in the next iteration? Any thoughts are welcome. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Synchronous vs. asynchronous for publish subscribe communication between JavaScript objects

    - by natlee75
    I implemented the publish subscribe pattern in a JavaScript module to be used by entirely client-side oriented JavaScript objects. This module has nothing to do with client-server communications in any way, shape or form. My question is whether it's better for the publish method in such a module to be synchronous or asynchronous, and why. As a very simplified example let's say I'm building a custom UI for an HTML5 video player widget: One of my modules is the "video" module that contains the VIDEO element and handles the various features and events associated with that element. This would probably have a namespace something like "widgets.player.video." Another is the "controls" module that has the various buttons - play, pause, volume, scrub, fullscreen, etc. This might have a namespace along the lines of "widgets.player.controls." These two modules are children of a parent "player" module ("widgets.player" ??), and as such would have no inherent knowledge of each other when instantiated as children of the "player" object. The "controls" elements would obviously need to be able to effect some changes on the video (click "Play" and the video should play), and vice versa (video's "timeUpdate" event fires and the visual display of the current time in the controls should update). I could tightly couple these modules and pass references to each other, but I'd rather take a more loosely coupled approach by setting up a pubsub type module that both can subscribe to and publish from. SO (thanks for bearing with me) in this kind of a scenario is there an advantage one way or another for synchronous publication versus asynchronous publication? I've seen some solutions posted online that allow for either/or with a boolean flag whereas others automatically do it asynchronously. I haven't personally seen an implementation that just automatically goes with synchronous publication... is this because there's no advantage to it? I know that I can accomplish this with features provided by jQuery, but it seems that there may be too much overhead involved here. The publish subscribe pattern can be implemented with relatively lightweight code designed specifically for this particular purpose so I'd rather go with that then a more general purpose eventing system like jQuery's (which I'll use for more general eventing needs :-).

    Read the article

  • What .NET objects should I use to create a cookie based session in MVC?

    - by makerofthings7
    I'm writing a custom password reset application that uses a validation technique that doesn't fit cleanly with ASP.NET Membership Provider's challenge questions. Namely I need to invoke a workflow and collect information from the end user (backup phone number, email address) after the user logs in using a custom form. The only way I know to create a cookie-based session (without too much "innovation" on my part) is to use WIF. What other standard objects can I use with ASP.NET MVC to create an authenticated session that works with non-windows user stores? Ideally I can store "role" or claim information in the session object such as "admin", "departmentXadmin", "normalUser", or "restrictedUser" The workflow would look like this: User logs in with username and password If the username and pw are correct a (stateless) cookie based session is created The user gets redirected to a HTML form that allows them to enter their backup phone number (for SMS dual factor), or validate it if already set. The user can then change their password using the form provided The "forgot password" would look like this User requests OTP code to be sent to the phone User logs in using username and OTP If the OTP is valid and not expired then create a cookie based session and redirect to a form that allows password reset Show password reset form, and process results.

    Read the article

  • Is Moving Entity Framework objects over a webservice really the best way?

    - by aceinthehole
    I've inherited a .NET project that has close to 2 thousand clients out in the field that need to push data periodically up to a central repository. The clients wake up and attempt to push the data up via a series of WCF webservices where they are passing each entity framework entity as parameter. Once the service receives this object, it preforms some business logic on the data, and then turns around and sticks it in it's own database that mirrors the database on the client machines. The trick is, is that this data is being transmitted over a metered connection, which is very expensive. So optimizing the data is a serious priority. Now, we are using a custom encoder that compresses the data (and decompresses it on the other end) while it is being transmitted, and this is reducing the data footprint. However, the amount of data that the clients are using, seem ridiculously large, given the amount of information that is actually being transmitted. It seems me that entity framework itself may be to blame. I'm suspecting that the objects are very large when serialized to be sent over wire, with a lot context information and who knows what else, when what we really need is just the 'new' inserts. Is using the entity framework and WCF services as we have done so far the correct way, architecturally, of approaching this n-tiered, asynchronous, push only problem? Or is there a different approach, that could optimize the data use?

    Read the article

  • how should I design Objects around this business requirement?

    - by brainydexter
    This is the business requirement: " A Holiday Package (e.g. New York NY Holiday Package) can be offered in different ways based on the Origin city: From New Delhi to NY From Bombay to NY NY itself ( Land package ) (Bold implies default selection) a. and b. User can fly from either New Delhi or Bombay to NY. c. NY is a Land package, where a user can reach NY by himself and is a standalone holidayPackage. " Let's say I have a class that represents HolidayPackage, Destination (aka City). public class HolidayPackage{ Destination holidayCity; ArrayList<BaseHolidayPackageVariant> variants; BaseHolidayPackageVariant defaultVariant; } public abstract class BaseHolidayPackageVariant { private Integer variantId; private HolidayPackage holidayPackage; private String holidayPackageType; } public class LandHolidayPackageVariant extends BaseHolidayPackageVariant{ } public class FlightHolidayPackageVariant extends BaseHolidayPackageVariant{ private Destination originCity; } What data structure/objects should I design to support: options a default within those options Sidenote: A HolidayPackage can also be offered in different ways based on Hotel selections. I'd like to follow a design which I can leverage to support that use case in the future. This is the backend design I have in mind.

    Read the article

  • How to rotate a group of objects around a common center?

    - by user1662292
    I've made a model in 3D Studio Max 9. It consists of a variety of cubes, clyinders etc. In XNA I've imported the model okay and it shows correctly. However, when I apply rotation, each component in the model rotates around it's own centre. I want the model to rotate as a single unit. I've linked the components in 3D Max and they rotate as I want in Max. protected override void LoadContent() { spriteBatch = new SpriteBatch(GraphicsDevice); model = Content.Load<Model>("Models/Alien1"); } protected override void Update(GameTime gameTime) { camera.Update(1f, new Vector3(), graphics.GraphicsDevice.Viewport.AspectRatio); rotation += 0.1f; base.Update(gameTime); } protected override void Draw(GameTime gameTime) { GraphicsDevice.Clear(Color.CornflowerBlue); Matrix[] transforms = new Matrix[model.Bones.Count]; model.CopyAbsoluteBoneTransformsTo(transforms); Matrix worldMatrix = Matrix.Identity; Matrix rotationYMatrix = Matrix.CreateRotationY(rotation); Matrix translateMatrix = Matrix.CreateTranslation(location); worldMatrix = rotationYMatrix * translateMatrix; foreach (ModelMesh mesh in model.Meshes) { foreach (BasicEffect effect in mesh.Effects) { effect.World = worldMatrix * transforms[mesh.ParentBone.Index]; effect.View = camera.viewMatrix; effect.Projection = camera.projectionMatrix; effect.EnableDefaultLighting(); effect.PreferPerPixelLighting = true; } mesh.Draw(); } base.Draw(gameTime); } More Info: Rotating the object via it's properties works fine so I'm guessing there's something up with the code rather than with the object itself. Translating the object also causes the objects to get moved independently of each other rather than as a single model and each piece becomes spread around the scene. The model is in .X format.

    Read the article

  • Windows Azure Use Case: New Development

    - 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: Computing platforms evolve over time. Originally computers were directed by hardware wiring - that, the “code” was the path of the wiring that directed an electrical signal from one component to another, or in some cases a physical switch controlled the path. From there software was developed, first in a very low machine language, then when compilers were created, computer languages could more closely mimic written statements. These language statements can be compiled into the lower-level machine language still used by computers today. Microprocessors replaced logic circuits, sometimes with fewer instructions (Reduced Instruction Set Computing, RISC) and sometimes with more instructions (Complex Instruction Set Computing, CISC). The reason this history is important is that along each technology advancement, computer code has adapted. Writing software for a RISC architecture is significantly different than developing for a CISC architecture. And moving to a Distributed Architecture like Windows Azure also has specific implementation details that our code must follow. But why make a change? As I’ve described, we need to make the change to our code to follow advances in technology. There’s no point in change for its own sake, but as a new paradigm offers benefits to our users, it’s important for us to leverage those benefits where it makes sense. That’s most often done in new development projects. It’s a far simpler task to take a new project and adapt it to Windows Azure than to try and retrofit older code designed in a previous computing environment. We can still use the same coding languages (.NET, Java, C++) to write code for Windows Azure, but we need to think about the architecture of that code on a new project so that it runs in the most efficient, cost-effective way in a Distributed Architecture. As we receive new requests from the organization for new projects, a distributed architecture paradigm belongs in the decision matrix for the platform target. Implementation: When you are designing new applications for Windows Azure (or any distributed architecture) there are many important details to consider. But at the risk of over-simplification, there are three main concepts to learn and architect within the new code: Stateless Programming - Stateless program is a prime concept within distributed architectures. Rather than each server owning the complete processing cycle, the information from an operation that needs to be retained (the “state”) should be persisted to another location c(like storage) common to all machines involved in the process.  An interesting learning process for Stateless Programming (although not unique to this language type) is to learn Functional Programming. Server-Side Processing - Along with developing using a Stateless Design, the closer you can locate the code processing to the data, the less expensive and faster the code will run. When you control the network layer, this is less important, since you can send vast amounts of data between the server and client, allowing the client to perform processing. In a distributed architecture, you don’t always own the network, so it’s performance is unpredictable. Also, you may not be able to control the platform the user is on (such as a smartphone, PC or tablet), so it’s imperative to deliver only results and graphical elements where possible.  Token-Based Authentication - Also called “Claims-Based Authorization”, this code practice means instead of allowing a user to log on once and then running code in that context, a more granular level of security is used. A “token” or “claim”, often represented as a Certificate, is sent along for a series or even one request. In other words, every call to the code is authenticated against the token, rather than allowing a user free reign within the code call. While this is more work initially, it can bring a greater level of security, and it is far more resilient to disconnections. Resources: See the references of “Nondistributed Deployment” and “Distributed Deployment” at the top of this article for more information with graphics:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee658120.aspx  Stack Overflow has a good thread on functional programming: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/844536/advantages-of-stateless-programming  Another good discussion on Stack Overflow on server-side processing is here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3064018/client-side-or-server-side-processing Claims Based Authorization is described here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee335707.aspx

    Read the article

  • Windows Azure Use Case: New Development

    - 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: Computing platforms evolve over time. Originally computers were directed by hardware wiring - that, the “code” was the path of the wiring that directed an electrical signal from one component to another, or in some cases a physical switch controlled the path. From there software was developed, first in a very low machine language, then when compilers were created, computer languages could more closely mimic written statements. These language statements can be compiled into the lower-level machine language still used by computers today. Microprocessors replaced logic circuits, sometimes with fewer instructions (Reduced Instruction Set Computing, RISC) and sometimes with more instructions (Complex Instruction Set Computing, CISC). The reason this history is important is that along each technology advancement, computer code has adapted. Writing software for a RISC architecture is significantly different than developing for a CISC architecture. And moving to a Distributed Architecture like Windows Azure also has specific implementation details that our code must follow. But why make a change? As I’ve described, we need to make the change to our code to follow advances in technology. There’s no point in change for its own sake, but as a new paradigm offers benefits to our users, it’s important for us to leverage those benefits where it makes sense. That’s most often done in new development projects. It’s a far simpler task to take a new project and adapt it to Windows Azure than to try and retrofit older code designed in a previous computing environment. We can still use the same coding languages (.NET, Java, C++) to write code for Windows Azure, but we need to think about the architecture of that code on a new project so that it runs in the most efficient, cost-effective way in a Distributed Architecture. As we receive new requests from the organization for new projects, a distributed architecture paradigm belongs in the decision matrix for the platform target. Implementation: When you are designing new applications for Windows Azure (or any distributed architecture) there are many important details to consider. But at the risk of over-simplification, there are three main concepts to learn and architect within the new code: Stateless Programming - Stateless program is a prime concept within distributed architectures. Rather than each server owning the complete processing cycle, the information from an operation that needs to be retained (the “state”) should be persisted to another location c(like storage) common to all machines involved in the process.  An interesting learning process for Stateless Programming (although not unique to this language type) is to learn Functional Programming. Server-Side Processing - Along with developing using a Stateless Design, the closer you can locate the code processing to the data, the less expensive and faster the code will run. When you control the network layer, this is less important, since you can send vast amounts of data between the server and client, allowing the client to perform processing. In a distributed architecture, you don’t always own the network, so it’s performance is unpredictable. Also, you may not be able to control the platform the user is on (such as a smartphone, PC or tablet), so it’s imperative to deliver only results and graphical elements where possible.  Token-Based Authentication - Also called “Claims-Based Authorization”, this code practice means instead of allowing a user to log on once and then running code in that context, a more granular level of security is used. A “token” or “claim”, often represented as a Certificate, is sent along for a series or even one request. In other words, every call to the code is authenticated against the token, rather than allowing a user free reign within the code call. While this is more work initially, it can bring a greater level of security, and it is far more resilient to disconnections. Resources: See the references of “Nondistributed Deployment” and “Distributed Deployment” at the top of this article for more information with graphics:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee658120.aspx  Stack Overflow has a good thread on functional programming: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/844536/advantages-of-stateless-programming  Another good discussion on Stack Overflow on server-side processing is here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3064018/client-side-or-server-side-processing Claims Based Authorization is described here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee335707.aspx

    Read the article

  • What's the standard algorithm for syncing two lists of objects?

    - by Oliver Giesen
    I'm pretty sure this must be in some kind of text book (or more likely in all of them) but I seem to be using the wrong keywords to search for it... :( A common task I'm facing while programming is that I am dealing with lists of objects from different sources which I need to keep in sync somehow. Typically there's some sort of "master list" e.g. returned by some external API and then a list of objects I create myself each of which corresponds to an object in the master list. Sometimes the nature of the external API will not allow me to do a live sync: For instance the external list might not implement notifications about items being added or removed or it might notify me but not give me a reference to the actual item that was added or removed. Furthermore, refreshing the external list might return a completely new set of instances even though they still represent the same information so simply storing references to the external objects might also not always be feasible. Another characteristic of the problem is that both lists cannot be sorted in any meaningful way. You should also assume that initializing new objects in the "slave list" is expensive, i.e. simply clearing and rebuilding it from scratch is not an option. So how would I typically tackle this? What's the name of the algorithm I should google for? In the past I have implemented this in various ways (see below for an example) but it always felt like there should be a cleaner and more efficient way. Here's an example approach: Iterate over the master list Look up each item in the "slave list" Add items that do not yet exist Somehow keep track of items that already exist in both lists (e.g. by tagging them or keeping yet another list) When done iterate once more over the slave list Remove all objects that have not been tagged (see 4.) Update Thanks for all your responses so far! I will need some time to look at the links. Maybe one more thing worthy of note: In many of the situations where I needed this the implementation of the "master list" is completely hidden from me. In the most extreme cases the only access I might have to the master list might be a COM-interface that exposes nothing but GetFirst-, GetNext-style methods. I'm mentioning this because of the suggestions to either sort the list or to subclass it both of which is unfortunately not practical in these cases unless I copy the elements into a list of my own and I don't think that would be very efficient. I also might not have made it clear enough that the elements in the two lists are of different types, i.e. not assignment-compatible: Especially, the elements in the master list might be available as interface references only.

    Read the article

  • Is there a distributed VCS that can manage large files?

    - by joelhardi
    Is there a distributed version control system (git, bazaar, mercurial, darcs etc.) that can handle files larger than available RAM? I need to be able to commit large binary files (i.e. datasets, source video/images, archives), but I don't need to be able to diff them, just be able to commit and then update when the file changes. I last looked at this about a year ago, and none of the obvious candidates allowed this, since they're all designed to diff in memory for speed. That left me with a VCS for managing code and something else ("asset management" software or just rsync and scripts) for large files, which is pretty ugly when the directory structures of the two overlap.

    Read the article

  • How to leverage Spring Integration in a real-world JMS distributed architecture?

    - by ngeek
    For the following scenario I am looking for your advices and tips on best practices: In a distributed (mainly Java-based) system with: many (different) client applications (web-app, command-line tools, REST API) a central JMS message broker (currently in favor of using ActiveMQ) multiple stand-alone processing nodes (running on multiple remote machines, computing expensive operations of different types as specified by the JMS message payload) How would one best apply the JMS support provided by the Spring Integration framework to decouple the clients from the worker nodes? When reading through the reference documentation and some very first experiments it looks like the configuration of an JMS inbound adapter inherently require to use a subscriber, which in a decoupled scenario does not exist. Small side note: communication should happen via JMS text messages (using a JSON data structure for future extensibility).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95  | Next Page >