|
What happens to the website if if can't talk to the database in the office?
|
|
|
|
|
Then our claims handlers and brokers can't retrieve specific information from our back office database.
Lobster Thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce, served in a Provençale manner with shallots and aubergines, garnished with truffle pate, brandy and a fried egg on top and Spam - Monty Python Spam Sketch
|
|
|
|
|
The point however is that you need a business decision about how that impacts the business functionality of the site. That in turn impacts the implementation.
Some possible implementations.
1. The site is unusable, and tells the user that.
2. Some specific parts are unusable and tells the user that.
3. Data from the office is cached, with perhaps appropriate expiration times (which again might require some user error if.)
4. Any down time at all is unacceptable thus a replication scheme is needed.
Not to mention of course that you want some way to be notified if the web site can't see the database.
|
|
|
|
|
If the web application must use the database in your office, then go for a web service (a WCF service in case of a .NET solution) in between your web site and the database, otherwise you may want to have a separate database for your web site.
I find it easy to have separate databases for each app and make them share data as needed instead of one big "do-it-all" database that is hard to maintain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi..
I own a Tektronix logic analyzer that was designed for Win95/98 and supported the old APM specification 1.2 for powering the system up and powering down. Under Win95/98 the soft button supported both power up and a safe shutdown/power off mode. After I upgraded to Win2000, both of these features were 'broken'. I discovered the bios issue with Win2000 not being able to turn power off to the analyzer(bios patch) but the only way I can accomplish this is with the traditional Start/Shutdown mouse seq. The front panel button no longer will initiate a shutdown/power off sequence. I am guessing that the bios had an embedded call to the windows function ExitWindowsEx. However, under Win2000 you needed to enable the proper privileges for the API function to properly work.
So... hopefully, someone is familiar with what I am asking and can recommend how to force a windows function call from within bios. I am comfortable patching the bios for this sort of thing. I just need some pointers if it makes sense.
If this is not possible/feasible what other options do I have? I've studied the APM spec but don't understand how to actually force the Windows OS to initiate a shutdown/power off sequence.
If anyone can offer some advice, I would appreciate it. I would love exchanging thoughts on this as I've not been able to find anyone knowledgeable to help.
Thanks for listening..
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Member 3906718 wrote: call to the windows function ExitWindowsEx.
Restarting the machine?
From a command prompt (or using [Windows-Key]-[R] to launch the "run" dialog)
shutdown /s /t 0 /f
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have a form, through which I have instantiated an array of objects of a class called resource. I am able to access all its methods from the said form. I have also instantiated another object from a class called schedule under the same main form. Each resource object contains an array used to store a number of parameters. These parameters need to be made available for the object schedule however I have encountered a dilemma. As per normal good programming practice the core code is separated from the user interface code and therefore the code is to be encapsulated in the said classes. But how can these two classes (instantiated in the main form) can pass such information
between each other?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Rephrasing to be sure that I understand the question.
You have a class A which takes a set of parameters.
You have a class B which produces a set of parameters.
You want ideas on how to move the data from B to A.
If that is your question...
You use another class which contains the parameters. Call it C. Class B creates an instance of C and returns it. Then that is passed to A.
In terms of implementation of C there are various ways to do it depending on exactly what the parameters consist of. The easiest is to just use properties. A more complex implementation would use a Dictionary. A Dictionary can be used to implement a multi-level structure as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all ...
My name : zidan
(( My skill ))
(flash actionscript = intermediate , c# = intermediate , php = beginner level , mysql = intermediate ,sqlserver = intermediate , ado.net = intermediate
,sqllite = intermediate ) developer .
My Weak area ( converting my idea into oops means creating classes and object even though i know the concept but sitll not able to implement this concept into my project
(( My problem ))
i don't have real team work experience and i dont have time all project i did so far all are normal once means i used function procedure ,, i
know the concept of oops But how to implement the concept in my real life project
i tried from 2 years to develop even small project but no one help me .. i read and download many books on design pattern and MVC and UML but still i didnt get it
i need a proper guidance since you people have lots of experience developing application i want to start building application based on oops concept please if you kindly
can help me ... in short i want to learn how to convert my project idea and wireframing to Classes and how to Relate those classes with each other .
i even gone through forums but they didn't acutely teach you how to implement oops from the start ( only partial help ) sometime i think it is a
secret people keep hiding even from other you wont find oops implementation even for small size project in books , video training .. i tried
a lot .. they only show theory with very simple example and then jump to the next point ..
(( My Request))
--> guide me how to architect any project in oops ...
i am doing Currently medium size project i am
working on it using ( C# 2005 , 2008 , Ado.net 3.5 or 2.0 , sqlserver 2005 , or 2008 ) i have knowledge in all these 3 areas .
- plus i did full study on this project since it is also for personal and public needs ( later when i publish it ) .
- the database design somewhat easy with little modification needed ..
- 80 % of this project is already done but i just used function procedure style not opps that means i am reusing only the functions but i want it to make it
in oops using MVC OOPs style . moreover i lost all data of this project because of my brother accidentally format the hard drive .
But later i spent 3 month working on the wire-framing work flow i even made it better the previous one with more options and features
** please **
i m ready to pay for the honest expert who is going to help ة on through out the project .. if any one would like to join my ( one person team )
he/she most welcome ... at the end all of us will gain experiences and name .. i m sure there many people have the same problem tht i had ... no loss ...
(( about this little project ))
it is Expenses Budget controller My father actually requested me if i can do this since he is writing his daily expenses in a notebook
i have seen many software that does the job but i didn't like their user interface and usability concept they make entering data long task complicated process .. so i decide to make a
better one considering ease of use , automation entry options , better UI Finally,,,,, of course i could go further explaining the project in details i have all UI and database and how it is going to
work documents but i want to see if you can take my hand and guide me .
you will see also
Thanks for this forum for opening their door and offering hands to guide us help us ...
I would appreciate your immediate attention to this ... please let me know what action you propose for me to take according to my above situation ..
Best Regard
Zaidan
|
|
|
|
|
capsulez wrote: secret people keep hiding even from other
Nope.
You can buy many books that show you how to paint. But that will not make you an artist.
The difference - experience.
And there is no way to teach it. Probably because it requires a great deal of knowledge. And often just patterns of thinking (not programming patterns) which one learns over time on how to learn/solve new problems.
But it does in fact help to just try. Even if you fail.
capsulez wrote: moreover i lost all data of this project because of my brother accidentally
format the hard drive .
You should learn about source control AND backups then.
You use both.
They complement each other and help to insure that loses are minimized.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been re-reading Arthur J. Riel's classic "Object-Oriented Design Heuristics."
One thing that I've found striking on this re-reading is how much Riel emphasizes the use of the mediator design pattern (though he doesn't refer to it as such). Specifically, it's heuristic 4.14:
"Objects which share lexical scope, should not have uses relationships between them."
What this means, basically, is that objects that exist at the same level of abstraction shouldn't be communicating with each other. Rather, they should be communicating with an object at a higher level of abstract which in turn takes the appropriate action and communicates any necessary info to the other objects at the lower level of abstraction, in other words, the mediator pattern.
(as an aside this heuristic conflicts somewhat with heuristic 4.13. Riel addresses this by suggesting the use of abstract classes, i.e. interfaces, as a means through which children communicate with their parents)
There are at least a couple of reasons for this heuristic. One, it promotes decoupling and reuse. If the objects at the same level of abstraction don't know about each other, they're more likely to be reuseable. Two, it lowers complexity. Instead of a many-to-many relationship between objects, you have a one-to-many, i.e. the mediator has a one-to-many relationship with its child objects. One-to-many relationships are easier to reason about and understand.
Following this heuristic, you can wind up with a layered approach in which each layer is made up of mediators. The child objects are in turn mediators to their child objects, and so on.
I like this idea in that it seems to strike a balance between a hyper object oriented approach in which objects are tangled together in a complex many-to-many web of connections and a strictly procedural approach in which nothing is connected. I'd never thought of mediator in this light before.
|
|
|
|
|
The use of the Mediator is a common technique in MVVM to provide cross-communication between ViewModels without requiring complex communication infrastructure. It's a great way to keep them decoupled.
|
|
|
|
|
Mediator use isn't strictly mandated to achieve the same thing.
Some alternatives
- Pass an interface.
- Refactor discoved common code into its own grouping.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I am working on a project to process three files...two CSVs and one XML. These files are being moved from a file share to a SQL Server database table using BizTalk. The xml file is being transformed into the same flat file format as the two flat files using a C# component in SSIS. Then, these flat files are processed by SSIS packages. There is a lot of business logic in the SSIS transformations. The SSIS packages also do several look-ups using linked servers. All lookups and transforms are done on a row-by-row basis (which is slow). Also, any errors that occur are put in a separate database table depending on the business object that causes the error (i.e. BusObj1_error, BusObj2_error, BusObj3_error).
Basically, I was hoping someone could suggest a better architecture that would improve performance, allow scalability and flexibility, and allow many developers works as a team on the same pieces of functionality.
E.g.
- Put validation rules in a db rather than hardcoded into SSIS.
- Instead of using different error tables, use a single error table with a errorTypeId FK to an ErrorType table.
- Migrate all transformations from SSIS C# so that multiple developers can work on different Business logic classes at same time.
Thanks
modified on Wednesday, August 3, 2011 5:28 AM
|
|
|
|
|
First steps when something is "slow".
Determine what the goal is to make it not "slow" (so are you looking for 10% or 20000% better.)
Second step is to determine why it is "slow" - specifically what parts make it slow.
Myself I would suspect SSIS and the linked sources.
Putting the raw data directly in the databae, in work tables, and then processing it there to produce the final result would probably be much faster.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks jschell
What would you say is the ideal architecture for what I have described?
|
|
|
|
|
What I would say is that the "ideal" architecture depends on specific details that one can only learn by studying the business requirements and needs in depth.
|
|
|
|
|
F***ing ETL, whoever put the transform in ETL should be taken out and shot.
Load the data into a staging table that exactly reflects the source data, NO transforms, no data types, make all the fields varchar(###) big enough to service your data fields.
Now you have the data in a platform that is designed to manipulate data. Write a stored procedure that transforms the data from the staging table to your target table. This gives you a fast, repeatable process that you can manage in TSQL not some obscure data/row/field/column transform object in your ETL tool. If you don't have TSQL skills then hire someone who does, they are not uncommon.
BizTalk, and every other transform tool I have ever had to use are garbage, I can write a bulk copy and stored procedure process that will out perform them every time. The only tool that came close to performance equality has been Informatica that will cost you $100k+ to implement.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the response, Mycroft.
I would tend to agree with you on using SQL tables and procs.
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: f***ing ETL, whoever put the transform in ETL should be taken out and shot.
LOL, Tell us how you really feel  Not that I disagree, the tools I've seen in action make Access loook like a rockstar (tibco and something from oracle)
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Given the example of an Invoice, where you have 2 distinct areas; a header and details.
Can someone shed some light on how I should design my classes to support this ?
Here is what I do now:
1) create a base class called, InvDetails
2) create a factory class call, InvDetailsFactory.
(The factory will be responsible for reading and updating the Invoice details)
3) create a base class called, InvHeader
4) create a factory class called InvHeaderFactory (same idea as above)
Should I create a single class, Invoice, which has 2 components: Header and a collection of Details ?
Your input is welcome and appreciated.
![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
To be specific an invoice is a 'report'. Where a report is a static presentation of existing data in a preset form.
A better starting point is a order entry screen which would have a create customer screen and a order entry screen.
The first lets the operator enter name, address, billing address, etc. From this you have a data model object called 'customer'
The second lets an operator pick a customer (already created) and the add order items for the customer. From this you have data model objects for 'order' and 'item' (or call it 'order item' if you prefer.)
For an invoice you would then start with a order number. That allows you to get the order and from that you get the items and customer. You also need a 'form'. The form describes the layout of the invoice itself. For example the name and address could be on the left with the order number on the right.
|
|
|
|
|
My bad for using the term, Invoice. Maybe it was confusing. Let's go with the concept of an "Order Entry" screen (web page).
My question still stands: "Should I create a single class, which has 2 components; Header and a collection of Details?" Or
Should I just create 2 separate classes, one that stores and manipulates the Header data while the other represents the details ?
Just looking for some suggestions / ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
My previous example described it specifically in terms of an order entry screen.
Precluding the orders themselves, other informatin on the screen would come from 'order', 'customer' and/or inventory (where the data model for that has not yet been defined.)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
