since you're allready a die-hard linux user, and you're taking the class to learn stuff, take the subject that you know the least about. Spend some time coding in MS land and confirm or dispel your preconceptions.
The underlying concepts of OO coding are pretty much the same whatever language and OS you use, but the broader your experience the better equiped you'll be for solving whatever problems you come across in your career.
having your apps portable across DB's is one of those things people always think is important but in my experience it's a total crock for an app that is going to be installed in a single location, i.e. a commerce website or an enterprise specific app.
You are just as likely to want to change your middle tier as your DB. More likely, in my opinion. If your business logic is in sprocs, then it's as easy to call from Java as it is from.Net.
I started working on existing app 3 years ago. At that time the app was a 3 tier ASP/COM/SQL Server app, where all the DB queries where dymanic SQL in the COM layer.
For performance reasons, we started pulling the SQL out of the COM layer and in to stored procs. The performance benefit came not because the sproc is precompiled, but because we can pass all the data to the DB in one hit, and not have to wait for network round trips between each step in a multiple step process.
Say you have the classic 'pay money in to your checque account from your saving account' example. You're business logic layer will probably be something like:
1. start a transaction 2. get the current savings account balance 3. make sure there's enough money in the account to support the request 4. debit the savings account 5. credit the cheque account 6. write some log (so the txn appears on the next bank statement) 7. commit the transaction
In a typical 3 tier app, between each of the steps above there will be a network round trip between each step, which will take say 10ms. neither the DB nor the app server is doing anything useful in that time, they are just waiting for data to go back and forth over the LAN. But you've got uncommitted transactions, which means rows or tables are locked so other processes have to wait.
So anyway, in order to scale up, we had to put all our business logic in to sprocs. The downside of this is writing stuff in TSQL in Query Analyzer means you don't get any nice IDE perks like code completion & intellisense etc.
The thing about having a DB guy is a red herring - you've got to have someone write SQL at some point, whatever layer you put it in.
The first MS product was an implementation of BASIC for the first ever micro-computer, the Altair. In the late 1970s and early 80s, all they did was languages. They did versions of BASIC for pretty much all the 8-bit computers.
Then IBM decided to make a microcomputer, so they asked MS to do a version of BASIC for them, and when some other deals fell through, IBM went back to MS and asked them if they could also do an operating system. Bill said yeah, no worries, went out and bought a company making something called QDOS, and renamed it PC-DOS (and then MS-DOS).
If OSS isn't going to cut it for what is really the single most import reason for giving your staff desktops in the first place, why are you so insistent that windows be kept out of your business?
Don't let your technical expertise convince you that you can make a better commercial decision than the suits.
And I would have called the ambo myself but my phone got broke in the impact, along with my arm,leg and dignity.
Good thing there was a car full of christian rugby league players coming the other way. They lifted the cab off me, dialled the ambo, they even said a little prayer for me while we waited for the medics to arrive.
Bless em.
I reckon they still cherish the memory. I'm just glad I gave them a chance to feel good about themselves, even if I did have to spend 2 months in bed with one tube pumping pain killers in, and another one pumping the urine out.
Since I'm not a self rightous middle class twat with delusions of saving the poor down-trodden masses, I'd say the 7,000 refugees/famine victims aren't being used for anything useful either so they can 'depart' as well.
We can keep the 'feed the world' t-shirts, USA for Africa videos, etc, and generations of the 'future' can reconstruct your tedious "I'm such a virtous wanker" pomposity through virtual reality whenever they feel the need.
Has anyone ever been involved with a project where escrow has done anything other than make management types feel warm and fuzzy?
I've just finished implementing a project where we are delivering a web service to a very large stuffy customer who insisted on an escrow aggreement, so they can continue to support the service if we go bust. To me this seemed kind of dumb, because I just can't see anybody coming in fresh to an app that's been hacked on by 20 different people over the last 5 years being able to actually make any sense of the system at all, not to mention that littered throughout the code are all sorts of assumptions about OS's, mail servers, domain names etc that would make it nigh on impossible to actually set up the application in a totally new environment.
Maybe on something like a missile guidance system, where the problem domain is well known, and the application itself has a well defined scope, it may be possible to take something out of escrow and give it to a new contractor to work on, but 9 times out of 10, if the originator goes belly up I'd think the old code is pretty much useless.
It's the same guy.
Look at the website advertised in the tag line of this message (https://www.psychosis.com/) then look at the contact email address on http://linuxrouter.org/ (dcinege _at_ psychosis.com).
For the DHTML code that is already in my browsers Window? I didn't sign any EULA by loading the page so what stops me from just modifying the code to my own purposes (and obsfucating it to avoid copyright stuff)?
The law? Your conscience?
The same things that stop people stealing any source code that is visible but not in the public domain (e.g. open source projects like Konquerer).
please explain to a moron like me 1) how much hotter a system with 2 drives and a RAID capable SCSI card would be than 2 drives with a SCSI card that cant' do RAID, and 2) why having a system with data that you can't boot OR a system you can boot but with no data is any use whatsoever. Either way you're going to be restoring from backups / install disks.
Whoops, you're right:
it's the fundamental reason that, despite our money-is-no-object premise, we're not going to relatively exotic technologies like liquid-cooled overclocking or RAID disk arrays for a performance boost. Sure, they may initially look attractive; but overclocked chips and banks of disk drives require massive cooling with lots of moving parts, and it's not good to be trying to do creative work like programming with anything that sounds quite so much like an idling jet engine sitting beside one's desk.
Which is fair enough if you are talking about a seperate drive enclosure with 12 drives in it. But 1 RAID capable SCSI controller and 2 drives mirrored isn't going to be any hotter or louder than 1 non RAID capable SCSI controller and 2 drives with no mirroring.
So my original point still stands - getting 2 drives without RAID is gives you no benefits over a single drive or 2 drives with RAID.
Slashdot Mirror
they're still in business. : http://www.brain.net.pk/aboutus.htm
No, this is a good analogy.
since you're allready a die-hard linux user, and you're taking the class to learn stuff, take the subject that you know the least about. Spend some time coding in MS land and confirm or dispel your preconceptions.
The underlying concepts of OO coding are pretty much the same whatever language and OS you use, but the broader your experience the better equiped you'll be for solving whatever problems you come across in your career.
whoops... that @OrderXML should by of type text, not test.
OK, make me a stored procedure that can take this kind of structure all at once and do all the appropriate inserts/updates
here's your sproc:
CREATE PROC usp_Order_Insert
(
@OrderXML as test
)
AS INSERT INTO Order (OrderXML) VALUES (@OrderXML)
GO
having your apps portable across DB's is one of those things people always think is important but in my experience it's a total crock for an app that is going to be installed in a single location, i.e. a commerce website or an enterprise specific app.
.Net.
You are just as likely to want to change your middle tier as your DB. More likely, in my opinion. If your business logic is in sprocs, then it's as easy to call from Java as it is from
I started working on existing app 3 years ago. At that time the app was a 3 tier ASP/COM/SQL Server app, where all the DB queries where dymanic SQL in the COM layer.
For performance reasons, we started pulling the SQL out of the COM layer and in to stored procs. The performance benefit came not because the sproc is precompiled, but because we can pass all the data to the DB in one hit, and not have to wait for network round trips between each step in a multiple step process.
Say you have the classic 'pay money in to your checque account from your saving account' example. You're business logic layer will probably be something like:
1. start a transaction
2. get the current savings account balance
3. make sure there's enough money in the account to support the request
4. debit the savings account
5. credit the cheque account
6. write some log (so the txn appears on the next bank statement)
7. commit the transaction
In a typical 3 tier app, between each of the steps above there will be a network round trip between each step, which will take say 10ms. neither the DB nor the app server is doing anything useful in that time, they are just waiting for data to go back and forth over the LAN. But you've got uncommitted transactions, which means rows or tables are locked so other processes have to wait.
So anyway, in order to scale up, we had to put all our business logic in to sprocs. The downside of this is writing stuff in TSQL in Query Analyzer means you don't get any nice IDE perks like code completion & intellisense etc.
The thing about having a DB guy is a red herring - you've got to have someone write SQL at some point, whatever layer you put it in.
The first MS product was an implementation of BASIC for the first ever micro-computer, the Altair. In the late 1970s and early 80s, all they did was languages. They did versions of BASIC for pretty much all the 8-bit computers.
Then IBM decided to make a microcomputer, so they asked MS to do a version of BASIC for them, and when some other deals fell through, IBM went back to MS and asked them if they could also do an operating system. Bill said yeah, no worries, went out and bought a company making something called QDOS, and renamed it PC-DOS (and then MS-DOS).
RTFA - 1963 is when they had the idea. it took till May 1, 1964 to finish it.
No need to implement MD5 in C#, just use the crypto APIs that come with .Net.
It's plenty fast.
If OSS isn't going to cut it for what is really the single most import reason for giving your staff desktops in the first place, why are you so insistent that windows be kept out of your business?
Don't let your technical expertise convince you that you can make a better commercial decision than the suits.
It was a taxi, not a a bus, you insensitive clod.
And I would have called the ambo myself but my phone got broke in the impact, along with my arm,leg and dignity.
Good thing there was a car full of christian rugby league players coming the other way. They lifted the cab off me, dialled the ambo, they even said a little prayer for me while we waited for the medics to arrive.
Bless em.
I reckon they still cherish the memory. I'm just glad I gave them a chance to feel good about themselves, even if I did have to spend 2 months in bed with one tube pumping pain killers in, and another one pumping the urine out.
maybe those wetbacks could fix up the damn antique rocket in exchange for green cards and a bowl of rice a day?
We all save 0.00007c of taxes, they get to give their children a chance to be IPO pump and dump scamsters, everybody wins!
Since I'm not a self rightous middle class twat with delusions of saving the poor down-trodden masses, I'd say the 7,000 refugees/famine victims aren't being used for anything useful either so they can 'depart' as well.
We can keep the 'feed the world' t-shirts, USA for Africa videos, etc, and generations of the 'future' can reconstruct your tedious "I'm such a virtous wanker" pomposity through virtual reality whenever they feel the need.
That's merely my opinion, though.
Has anyone ever been involved with a project where escrow has done anything other than make management types feel warm and fuzzy?
I've just finished implementing a project where we are delivering a web service to a very large stuffy customer who insisted on an escrow aggreement, so they can continue to support the service if we go bust. To me this seemed kind of dumb, because I just can't see anybody coming in fresh to an app that's been hacked on by 20 different people over the last 5 years being able to actually make any sense of the system at all, not to mention that littered throughout the code are all sorts of assumptions about OS's, mail servers, domain names etc that would make it nigh on impossible to actually set up the application in a totally new environment.
Maybe on something like a missile guidance system, where the problem domain is well known, and the application itself has a well defined scope, it may be possible to take something out of escrow and give it to a new contractor to work on, but 9 times out of 10, if the originator goes belly up I'd think the old code is pretty much useless.
It's the same guy. Look at the website advertised in the tag line of this message (https://www.psychosis.com/) then look at the contact email address on http://linuxrouter.org/ (dcinege _at_ psychosis.com).
err... if you actually read the site, setting this up involved painting every window white and wiring up 160 lamps with over 5000m of cable.
That's one heck of a covert operation if you can pull that off without a little inside assistance!
For the DHTML code that is already in my browsers Window? I didn't sign any EULA by loading the page so what stops me from just modifying the code to my own purposes (and obsfucating it to avoid copyright stuff)?
The law? Your conscience?
The same things that stop people stealing any source code that is visible but not in the public domain (e.g. open source projects like Konquerer).
Yet another victory for Lynx users. When was the last time you heard of a terminal-based text-only browser bringing down a Unix system? ;)
Just this week, actually.
It's PINE not Lynx that's affected, but it is a terminal-based text-only app that has a problem opening urls.
except entries must be cutups of Anonymous Coward postings instead.
I'm not sure what an MSCE - did you mean an MCSE?
Not that the guy in the article is one of those either.
How bout COM?
please explain to a moron like me 1) how much hotter a system with 2 drives and a RAID capable SCSI card would be than 2 drives with a SCSI card that cant' do RAID, and 2) why having a system with data that you can't boot OR a system you can boot but with no data is any use whatsoever. Either way you're going to be restoring from backups / install disks.
Yep. More vulnerable to any one disk crashing, less vulnerable to both going out at once...
But the way they have it configed, you're going to screwed till you can do a restore from media if either crashes, not both.
Whoops, you're right:
it's the fundamental reason that, despite our money-is-no-object premise, we're not going to relatively exotic technologies like liquid-cooled overclocking or RAID disk arrays for a performance boost. Sure, they may initially look attractive; but overclocked chips and banks of disk drives require massive cooling with lots of moving parts, and it's not good to be trying to do creative work like programming with anything that sounds quite so much like an idling jet engine sitting beside one's desk.
Which is fair enough if you are talking about a seperate drive enclosure with 12 drives in it. But 1 RAID capable SCSI controller and 2 drives mirrored isn't going to be any hotter or louder than 1 non RAID capable SCSI controller and 2 drives with no mirroring.
So my original point still stands - getting 2 drives without RAID is gives you no benefits over a single drive or 2 drives with RAID.