Control Advantages

What are the the general control advantages of using SAP rather than other programs such as Excel?

I will move this to the Coffee Corner forum (it is SDN's pub, so fetch yourself a beer..
Generally, you find a lot of use of Excel because it is convenient, and sometimes also be able to adverse engineer your business processes to "skip" intended processing within SAP because the exceptions cannot be coded statically, or even dynamically. There are also reverse engineering tools available to analyze this.
In those cases, you might find an .xls referred to as the "blabla bla" database somewhere in the documentation...
In SOX environments it is a big problem... and there are many expensive tools available which are infact only a frontend to a file system with some version management (file space permitting, per file, per change).
In both cases the admin (or a hacker) within the server network will probably toast your controls anyway. The bugger with Excel, is that you typically have to make it available to the client network (or it is open on the client machine anway, so you will have challenges protecting your server network).
My 2 cents,
Julius

Similar Messages

Advantages and disadvantages of having 2 controlling areas.

Dear All.
My client have 2 company codes and will use same fiscal year variant and chart of account. so we recommend for one contrilling area. But my client wants some document or wants to know the advantages and disadvantages of having 2 controlling areas.
I will really do appreciate if anybody hepls me in this regards.

there is no general correct answer as every case is the different.
However, the majority of solutions that have a single CoA will also have a single Controlling Area.
The Controlling Area is the highest reporting level in Controlling, PCA, CCA etc.
Normally if you have two CoA then you will have two Controlling Areas.
A simple point to make to them is that a Controlling Area can only have 1 CoA, therefore you cant have 2.
Are your Company Codes in the same Country?

Advantages of PI sheet and control recipe

can u pls let me know the advantages of using Process instruction sheet and control recipe,
and if it is not maintained , then what will be the reflection.
thnx-rgds
Amitabh

Hi,
Control recipe is used to send a proper destination or to the operator who has to input the data and confirm this action performed.
control recipe will be sent back to the process order and instructions with data will be available. when creating a process order, control recipe will be created, which will contain the process instruction.
To specify the PI that are to be generated in the processorder when control recipe is created for the control recipe destination.
There are 3 steps to be performed such as
1) Define control recipe destinations
2) Assign PI Categories
3) Set process instructions to be gerated automatically
Please let me know.
Regards,
Mohan R

Whats the Advantages of OEM Grid control

Hi All,
I would like to know what the term "Grid control" means and whats the advantages of OEM10g Grid Control over OEM 9i....
If anyone has good docuements,Please share the source.It will be highly appriciated.
Thanks in Advance..
Anand

Oracle Enterprise Manager comes in 3 editions - Database Control, Fusion Middleware Control (also known as Application Server Control) and Grid Control.
Database and Fusion Middleware Control are the base consoles shipped with Oracle Database and Fusion Middleware, respectively.
Grid Control is the full fledge EM that is capable of managing everything from Oracle Database, Fusion Middleware, Siebel, PeopleSoft, Oracle E-Business Suite to 3rd party technologies such as BEA Weblogic, IBM DB2, Microsoft SQL Server, F5 Load Balancer, etc...
In addition to support for more types of technologies, 10g also includes additional capabilities such as service level management, configuration management, provisioning, etc...
Here is the link for more info.
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/oem/index.html
Here is the link to download it to try for yourself.
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/oem/index.html

Advantage of Process-Controlled Workflow

Good Morning!
What are the advantage of Process-Controlled Workflow? (and/or what are the advantage of Business-Rule-Framework?)

I am looking at a SRM 5.5 upgrade to SRM 7 and moving to PCW represents issues and risk to me.
The SAP Migration program /sapsrm/pr_wf_migration_cfg does not deal with the N Step Badi Wf's.
SAP's recommendation is to complete all active Wf's are restart with PCW which means finalising all approvals restarting Approvals using PCW from the start,
SAP recommend ALL processes should be moved to PCW from ACW in a production environment.
If your trying to implement a ACW N Step Badi in PCW then you will probably be looking at Resp Resolvers that refer to a Badi implementation where you will need abap code.
Not sure about a flexible set of approval levels, but think that's another Badi implementation, with abap code.
Not over impressed, I'm afraid. Better structured abap program code in the N Step BADI could be an improvement

Advantage of Oracle job over Crontab\Control-M?

Is there any advantage of having Job functionality using DBMS_JOBS over Unix crontab\control-M?
Regards,
Bhagat

In what way u need the adv. It depends on what ur application need is.
Is your oracle is installaed on Unix platform, then calling a oracle proc though a small script and putting the same in crontab provides much control over your job. Instead going to DB everytime......
Cheers.......... Bob

What is Advantage of Control Frame work architecture

can i know the advantage of control framework architecture over normal architecture ?

Welcome to SDN!!
The Follwoing docs explains in details in using TREE (which is of CFA) in SAP.
<a href="http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/b7/147a36c">SAP's CF</a>
Thanks
Jack
<b>PS: Allot points if it helps !!!</b>
Message was edited by: Jack

Dis-advantages of not using Teststand source control feature.

I'm in the process of creating a Workspace file for our project, primarily because we want to use the Teststand Deployment Utility.
Included in this process is the choice to use Teststand's source control features.
So far we have been using Microsoft's Source Safe application directly to provide source control with no problems.
But now, having tried to incorporate Teststand's source control feature, which utilises Source Safe, I find myself getting bogged down in a tedious and time consuming process which I feel will eventually cause more confusion and errors than it prevents.
If we choose not to put the files in Source Control when the Workspace file is created, do we run the risk of problems at a later stage ?
Thanks.

Hi Gary,
there's no "risk" as such, however by not useing some sort of source code control or configuration management, you are making a definite commitment that you will not roll back to a previous version, and you'll be doing your own backups, and making sure that if several people require access to a particular file at the same time, that only one person is going to be allowed (by agreeing to it) to modify the file.
There's nothing that says you have to go through the TestStand sequence editor and the other workspace and projects to do the source code control.
If you prefer, then use Visual Source Safe as a stand alone interface, and check out the files by hand to your local drive, and then work on them, and then check them back in once you're finished.
Of course, you have to make sure that your relative and absolute paths are correct when you do check out the files.
By going through the TestStand sequence editor to check in and check out files, it's more convenient for most people, since they don't have to dive around two environments (TestStand and VSS) to get to the point of being able to modify a file, or even find out if someone else is modifying it.
Hope that helps.
Thanks
Sacha Emery
National Instruments (UK)
// it takes almost no time to rate an answer

What is the advantage of UBR/UER as Control Accounts

Hello Expers / Dina,
Could it be possible to explain the concept behind adding a new features of UBR/UER as Control Accounts in Oracle Projects Billing R12.1.3
According to Oracle :-
With Unbilled Revenue or Unearned Revenue (UBR/UER) as control accounts, you can now re-interface rejected invoices or revenues without any discrepancy at the project and transaction levels.
What does they really mean to say?
Please help.
Thanks
:-)

Hi,
I found the bug which led to this new enhancement. Here is a summary of the issue prior to the latest release:
"In the current model, UBR/UER calculations are done when revenue or invoice is interfaced. There is a known issue with this model when a interfaced revenue get rejected by GL or a interfaced invoice gets rejected by AR. Tieback
process will clear off the ubr/uer on the rejected documents as the UBR/UER will be rederived when they get reinterfaced. This is a technical limitation of the current architecture. We are looking at a solution which will not clear off the UBR/UER at document level during tieback process and will reinterface the documents with the same UBR/UER."
Due to this limitation customers were having to do manual GL journals. When they wanted to start using Third party global control accounts it was restricting them from being able to do manual journals, hence we had to fix the root issues before they could continue using control accounts.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Dean

Why does COMCAST work so hard to prevent me from taking advantage of MOCA/XB3?

I apologize in advance for the length of this post and its frustrated tone but I've spent so much time and effort trying to accomplish something that should have been quite straightforward with COMCAST but which has left me with a very biter taste in my mouth. I hope to get the attention of other concerned COMCAST customers in similar situations and the ears of people at COMCAST who can make a difference and change their current misguided policies and business models around MOCA. I also vent because of the long standing vexing problem of not being able to get the full use of the XFinity Internet I've been paying for every month for the last thirten years despite the recent availability of standardized network distribution technology in the form of MOCA 2.0 which is advertised by COMCAST as a feature of multiple versions of their latest Wireless Internet Gateways which customers are paying for but yet unable to utilize. See: http://www.cedmagazine.com/news/2013/04/comcast-bows-faster-gateway-doubles-speeds-on-2-data-tiers In a blog post on Comcast’s site, Rob Slinkard, senior vice president, product management, communications and data services, wrote that while data tiers have increased their speeds over the years, thanks in part to DOCSIS 3.0 deployments, in-home wireless gateways aren’t always capable of passing those faster speeds around a home. Coupled with the plethora of devices in subscribers homes, an inefficient wireless gateway can be a chokepoint in subscribers’ home networks.
“Today we are launching a new device that solves this problem and creates the fastest in-home wireless network available anywhere in the U.S.,” Slinkard wrote. “The new Xfinity Wireless Gateway includes the 5.0 GHz radio frequency. This new frequency is being used by many of the latest consumer electronic products (like the iPhone 5, iPad 4 and Kindle Fire HD) and results in better speed and performance from connected devices.
“It also has been built to a new standard (MoCA 2.0), which allows the device to leverage a home’s existing coaxial cable network to create a faster and more efficient network of connected devices within the home.” It has been several years since I started this troublesome journey to extend WiFi/Internet access to my living room. My Comcast cable modem/eMTA and wireless gateway is installed upstairs on one side of my home and no matter what Wireless AP device or technology I use I cannot get a strong WiFi signal downstairs especially in my living room, kitchen and dining room where a majority of my Internet access takes place. In particular, my phones and tablets sometimes drop off the WiFi network due to dead-zones and I'm unable to successfully stream any movies at even a low 2-3Mbits on my media center or streaming devices, sometimes even for home movies stored on my personal server upstairs which is connected directly to the COMCAST Wireless gateway at Gigabit speeds. Over the years, I've spent hundreds of dollars on various WiFi access points, extenders, multiple powerline adapters etc.. all to no benefit. Unfortunately my decade-old home was not built with structured wiring and the AC power lines must be too noisy for powerline AV to work any better than WiFi and so I'm stuck with at most 1-3 Mbps of sustained bandwidth from my living room to both my personal media server upstairs and the Internet. This low speed, unreliable Internet access in the center of my home entertainment area is completely unacceptable to me. Then I learnt this year from Comcast's own press releases like the one quoted above in cedmagazine that their newest Wireless gateways (Cisco DPC3939 or Technicolor TC8706C) are equipped with MOCA 2.0. MOCA is designed exactly for the kind of network distribution problem that I have. MOCA takes the Internet/Ethernet and sends it over the already laid down cable/coaxial lines in your home at high speed using the unused bandwidth available on the coax wires. It is standardized and is pretty much plug and play if you have the devices. In theory with MOCA anyone can have a fully networked high speed broadband home relying on just the coaxial wiring that most homes already have. After years of changing my WiFi access points multiple times looking for better coverage, I finally decided to try the COMCAST all-in-one Wireless Internet Gateway and eMTA (Technicolor wireless Gateway 1) but after lots of troubles with poor signal reception, frequent disconnection/drops and faulty DNS configuration that cannot be changed by the end-user, I decided to request a change to the more capable XB3 Wireless Gateway 2 with MOCA 2.0 whole-house networking features. I started a web chat with the Comcast technical representative that worked in the department for gateway replacement. I told her about my WiFi distribution problem and that I already had the Technicolor Gateway and that I needed to get Gateway 2 -- the so-called XB3. She was very quick to tell me that she knew *exactly* what I wanted and had dealt with this before. I went into detail about MOCA, about the lack of MOCA 2.0 adapters available to purchase by consumers and that she should make sure that my replacement XB3 kit came with the necessary MOCA -> Ethernet adapter or MOCA WiFi AP that I would need to extend the Comcast Internet service to my living room. She acknowledged everything, said she was creating notes about MOCA adapter for the dept that would ship out the XB3. I couldn't believe how easy it was to order the XB3 and required MOCA adapter/WiFi AP. I was so pleasantly suprised and impressed by the customer service I thought I had received from Comcast. I made sure to give her the best review scores when the chat was complete and a Comcast survey was presented to me. Later I received a FedEx shipment notice and a few days later I was shocked when I opened the package to see that I had been shipped the exact same Technicolor (non-MOCA) single band WiFi gateway (Gateway 1) which I already had and which I had specifically told the customer support agent that I did not want again. I was shocked at the deception and false promises that I had received from this Comcast customer support specialist. Even though the entire chat conversation was recorded, she had no problem lying to me directly that she was sending me an XB3 when she clearly had no intention of doing so. I later took this unwanted Technicolor Wireless Gateway 1 back to the Comcast store in Auburn WA and there the customer service representative argued with me over and over about MOCA and it was clear that he had no idea what MOCA was or why it is such a boon to anyone who has problems getting WiFi coverage in a home. He also stated that he knew nothing about XB3 boxes and that the Comcast store did not have any and that he couldn't find any information about XB3 in his computer. He also gave me a Motorola HD PVR which he said was newer than the really ancient one I had but which still had component outputs for my older TV unlike the X1 (to my knowledge). A few weeks later, I went back again to the same store and requested an XB3 Wireless gateway 2. This time the customer service agent I spoke to seemed to have some idea that MOCA existed (she said she had it installed in her home) but then insisted that I could not get an XB3 with MOCA *unless* I also ordered an X1 Comcast HD PVR. Also she said that it required professional installation and I would be charged for that even though all I wanted in the first place was just the XB3 MOCA Gateway. I asked her if the XB3 kit came with a MOCA -> Ethernet adapter or MOCA WiFi AP for the living room and then it became clear that she really either did not understand the use of MOCA for network distribution or she was playing dumb. She kept on insisting that Comcast does *NOT* provide any MOCA adapters or WiFi access points to use with the XB3 to extend the home network. Frustrated, I kept on asking her why there was a required bundling of MOCA Wireless gateway with a specific model of COMCAST DVR that I didn't want and she just insisted that was the way things had to be done. I also explained to her that I had an older Plasma TV without HDMI inputs. She finally went to talk to her supervisor and came out with a XB3 and an X1 HD DVR. I didn't want the X1 but I was very eager to get a chance to use MOCA to allow me to use my Comcast Xfinity Internet reliably downstairs. I figured that perhaps the the new X1 PVR had a built-in MOCA client and an Ethernet port with which I could use to plug in my own WiFi access point and thus have both 100% signal strength downstairs as well as high bandwidth hardwired network link backhaul upstairs back to the XB3. Last night, I finally installed the XBR3 after multiple false starts with the device sometimes refusing to complete activation or losing complete connectivity to my hardwired PC, turned on MOCA (which was disabled by default) and then tried to install the X1 DVR but suddenly discovered at 1AM in the morning that the X1 really didn't have any component outputs. There was no way to hook it up to my TV. Anyway, I wanted so badly to get MOCA as a network extender working that didn't care at that point about the TV and just wanted to make sure that the MOCA worked. The XB3 upstairs said that it detected 2 MOCA devices in my home, everything looks good although it would have been nicer if the XB3 detailed what devices were connected via MOCA and perhaps what version of MOCA they were using. Anyway, since I could not see the X1 screen on my TV or perform any setup I may have needed to do to setup MOCA on the X1, I gave up with that and tried the older non-X1 Motorola DVR (DCX3501M/MOR200BN) which some googling showed that it too actually supported MOCA (see http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/11/motorola-rolls-out-the-latest-hd-dvr-the-dcx3501-m/) as well though it was not an X1 model. I setup the Motorola DVR and after it was activated, I plugged the media center into the the back of the Motorola DVR's ethernet port. The media center showed that it was trying to acquire an IP address but no matter what it could not succeed. I called up COMCAST technical support again. It was 1:30AM. As usual the technical customer service representative had no idea what MOCA was and couldn't even clarify if it was possible to connect my streaming media device into the back of the Motorola DVR using an Ethernet cable and get Internet access that way via MOCA. In all my encounters with COMCAST support personel so far I've noticed that they all claim to know what MOCA is but yet keep on saying things that demonstrate clearly that they have no idea what it it is, how it works, why a consumer would want to use it for network distribution and most shockingly have no idea whether or how MOCA home networking is supported by Comcast products. This representative insisted over and over that I needed to setup a truck roll appointment for a technician to help me troubleshoot my MOCA/DVR issue but yet she would not clarify the simple question about whether COMCAST supported the use of the Ethernet port on the Motorola DVR to provide Internet access to begin with and she was not willing to pass me on to a support person who knew what MOCA was and how it was supported by COMCAST. What was the point of staying at home to wait for a technician to troubleshoot a device scenario that may not even be supported by COMCAST to begin with? Are all these COMCAST technical support representatives not even trained on the products that COMCAST is selling/installing in our homes? Why are they all clueless about MOCA technology even though COMCAST itself touts this feature in every press release about their new Wireless Gateways? The very unhelpful customer service agent rudely transfered me to another number without any warning, the number had a recorded message saying nobody was available and then hung up on me. Now, that is the kind of customer service I'm used to from COMCAST. I spent the next 30 minutes googling Comcast X1 DVR to figure out if any of the new ones supported component outputs and ended up learning more than I wanted to about Comcast RNG reference designs, X1/X2 software and finally the important fact that the Comcast X1 HD DVR has two variants manufactured by two seperate companies PACE and ARRIS and that one of the variants by PACE has on-board component outputs. That is the X1 DVR that the local Auburn store support person should have given me after I had told her that I did not have HDMI inputs on my TV. It was 2:30am. This morning I called up COMCAST technical support again and the representative I spoke to was quite helpful at first with helping to determine that my Auburn COMCAST store had a dozen+ units of the X1 DVR with component outputs. He also gave me a free 90days HBO due to all the time I've wasted driving back and forths to the Comcast store and getting/returning products, which was nice although I usually don't watch premium cable channels or much TV anyway; but still an appreciated gesture. Now that I was going to get an X1 DVR that would work with my TV and which I had reason to believe had on-board MOCA for Internet access, I asked the tech support representative if COMCAST did not sell or rent a MOCA 2.0 -> Ethernet adapter or WiFi AP, how was I going to use this X1 to extend the Internet downstairs for my mobile devices and to my TV for streaming movies? That simple question seemed to unnerve him for some reason. Once I got into this questioning about MOCA it was deja-vu all over again. He claimed to fully understand MOCA, claimed that the X1 used it to access applications and the Internet but insisted that I need to have a truck-roll again to my home from the Wifi experts to "troubleshoot" my WiFi distribution problem. Geez. I'd already been through these unreasonable conversations before multiple times! I tried to explain that I did not want or need any truck roll (more importantly, I'm not taking a day off work to wait for a house visit). I didn't need someone to troubleshoot something if the support personal himself doesn't even know if it is supported to begin with. While trying to explain that all I was asking for was an answer if the X1 exposed the Internet via it's rear Ethernet port or how otherwise I was supposed to access the Internet via the MOCA coax outlet, the line was dropped. Again, the typical COMCAST customer support. I've done a lot more research on MOCA and COMCAST and my thinking now is that the possible reason why COMCAST goes out of its way to make it very difficult for consumers to deploy MOCA whole house networking using its gear and why every single one of their representatives I've spoken to about MOCA home networking have acted very antagonistic towards that topic is because COMCAST does *NOT* want customers to learn about or utilize MOCA for whole house networking unless they are using a locked-in MOCA that works only with COMCAST proprietary video on demand, DVR/Cloud-DVR and other closed ecosystem multimedia entertainment products. Basically, a COMCAST customer who can have easy high speed broadband wired and wireless access in every room of their house via MOCA 2.0 is also a customer that may be tempted to start using over-the-top Internet television, streaming and entertainment services such as Amazon Instant Video, Dramatize, DramaFever, Crackle, HBO, Hulu, myTV, NetD, Netflix, NowTV, Qello, RPI TV, WhereverTV and Chromecast that are not controlled by COMCAST and which COMCAST makes no extra money off of you when you do it in every room of your home due to the power of MOCA and the accessibility of COAX conenctors in most rooms of most homes. Basically COMCAST touts MOCA 2.0 and puts it into their latest Wireless gateways, DVRs and set top boxes not to help their customers easily have high speed whole house inter-networking but ONLY for the purpose of exploiting your in-home COAX wiring for their closed multimedia services like AnyRoom DVR etc.. That is why they allow their X1 and other DVRs and set top boxes to access the Internet via MOCA but then disable the rear ethernet ports so that your own entertainment streaming devices cannot also make use of the fast broadband connection. That is also why some of the COMCAST employees I've tried to get help from have stated in no uncertain terms that COMCAST will not sell or rent to me any device that allows my own devices to access the high speed MOCA 2.0 broadband connection that I pay for every month with my Xfinity Triple Play and Wireless Gateway rental fees. Look right here where COMCAST explains the benefits of the two main Wireless Gateways it rents to customers: http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-support/internet/wireless-gateway-compare/For the Wireless Gateway 2 which I'm currently renting from them, COMCAST clearly marks out that this Gateway offers "MOCA". COMCAST then explains what MOCA is:
"MoCA: Multimedia over Coax Alliance. MoCA is a universal standard for home networking over the in-home coaxial cable. MoCA can be used to extend the Wi-Fi range of the Wireless Gateway 2, using a Wireless Ethernet Coax Bridge (WEC." Note though that COMCAST refuses to sell or rent you that Wireless Ethernet Coax Bridge to make use of your spanking new MOCA. At least that is what several COMCAST technical and support persons have told me. That document above though, is a COMCAST document aimed at current and future customers and it clearly explains the benefits of MOCA. But yet I'm supposed to believe that out of the six or so COMCAST technical and customer support personel I've spoken to about MOCA not a single one of them knows about this obvious purpose of MOCA and that they all refuse to rent or sell me equipment that allows my own devices to use the high speed MOCA broadband Internet that their own devices such as the X1 can access inside my home? I'm also supposed to believe that it is a coincidence that COMCAST spends the time, effort and cost to build in MOCA 2.0 into their DVRs and settop boxes but then blocks access to make use of it via the Ethernet ports on all their MOCA capable set top boxes and DVRs? These devices are all rented by COMCAST and they charge hefty monthly bills for it but then they disable my full use of the technology which I've already paid for? Finally, I wanted to find a store where I could buy my own MOCA 2.0 Wireless Ethernet Coax Bridge or MOCA compatible Wireless Access point in order to bypass COMCAST's blatent attempt to monopolize MOCA wholehouse broadband for just its own entertainment services. I couldn't find any ! It turns out that not a single manufacturer of MOCA 2.0 products (head-unit or adapters) will agree to sell any directly to a consumer - all of them will only sell to large ISPs and Cable companies like COMCAST. This makes absolutely no sense for such an important consumer technlogy. Imagine if all the Wifi AP and Cable Modem companies decided that you would not be able to buy their products and they would only sell to giant monopolistic companies like COMCAST that require that you indefinitely rent these devices and also insists on crippling them as well to remove basic functionality that the manufacturers had already built in for the benefit of the end-user? But then I thought back to the commotion a few months ago where people were buying the Cisco DPC3939 (ie, XB3) Wireless Gateway with MOCA 2.0 and having it activated without having to pay the ridiculous unending COMCAST rental fees and how quickly COMCAST acted to ban activation of Cisco DPC3939's that were purchased outright by customers by suggesting without any proof given whatsoever that the customers must have purchased "stolen" goods. How much does COMCAST make from overcharging so many customers for so long for "HD" DVRs (separate charge for DVR, separate charge for HD ability in 2014??), settop boxes, cable modems, eMTA etc..? I calculate that almost since the entire time I've been signed up to Comcast for Television in 2004, I've paid them at least $200/year for the right to use a slow, buggy and primitive 1080i 4:3 aspect ratio HD DVR with 250GB hard drive. Over ten years, I've paid COMCAST more than $2,000 for a device that I still don't own and has never offered anything to me but which I was forced to rent and use because COMCAST fought and lobbied during the late 90s and early 2000's to ensure that other companies could not make and sell consumer purchasable devices that were able to access the cable content I had already paid COMCAST for. Today, a 1 Terabyte hard drive along with a compact system able to both play & stream 4K UHD TV, install apps, play games and designed much better than anything that has ever come out of COMCAST costs about $200 to $300 in total at retail. COMCAST and other cable companies ensured that the burden of CableCard and restrictive licensing and usage rights and the complexity of the associated industry crypto regulations would kill off innovative products like Microsoft Windows Media Center which despite all its great features was unable to access Digital cable channel content especially as COMCAST started vigerously encrypting every single channel on their lineup -- even the usually free-to-air channels like ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS etc.. Never mind the extra $5 to $10 they charged you a month to "rent" a single cable card that allowed you to only watch or record one Digital cable channel even though their own Cable company DVRs and set top boxes did not require the additional rental of cablecards to access digital cable via two or even five channels. This was all to cripple competing 3rd party devices while giving an unfair advantage to their own crippled products. I've come to believe that the situation with the inexplicable crippling of MOCA by COMCAST is no different. COMCAST is going out of its way to lock out 3rd party television-like services, devices and streaming applications from using the whole house MOCA 2.0 broadband Internet that is made possible by their XB3 Wireless Gateway and the coax cables that *I* paid to be put into my own home even if it means cruelly denying *all* their customers a very elegant and cost effective solution to the common problem of poor WiFi Internet coverage in homes. Finally, as the last persuasive piece of evidence supporting this belief that COMCAST is actively working to prevent its customers from using MOCA 2.0 because it does not want them to have the *choice* and *opportunity* to access reliable Internet TV-like multimedia not purchased from or controlled by COMCAST, I refer you to the absurd mandatory bundling of the COMCAST XB3 MOCA 2.0 Wireless Gateway with the COMCAST MOCA 2.0 X1 DVR and Cloud based Entertainment device. Clearly COMCAST wants you to pay for and rent their own substandard Television streaming/DVR device even if you don't want it and prefer to use something else with better design, reliability, quality and content. They want to tax you every month for using the Coaxial cables that you paid for in your own home. It seems to me now that COMCAST believes that the great advance of MOCA 2.0 is soley a benefit for their bottom line a sole benefit to themselves of extending their broadband high speed Internet access monopoly into the market for streaming/online video services even if it is at the expense of providing a quality whole-house Internet service and associated devices and accessories that meet the needs of their numerous customers.

Among the alternatives not mentioned... Using a TiVo DVR, rather than the X1; a Roamio Plus or Pro would solve both the concern over the quality of the DVR, as well as providing the MoCA bridge capability the poster so desperately wanted the X1 DVR to provide. (Although the TiVo's support only MoCA 1.1.) Just get a third-party MoCA adapter for the distant location. Why the hang-up on having a device provided by Comcast? This seems especially ironic given the opinions expressed regarding payments over time to Comcast. If a MoCA 2.0 bridge was the requirement, they don't exist outside providers. So couldn't the poster have simply requested a replacement XB3 from the local office and configured it down to only providing MoCA bridging -- and perhaps as a wireless access point? Comcast would bill him the monthly rate for the extra device, but such is the state of MoCA 2.0. Much of the OP sounds like frustration over devices providing capabilities the poster *thinks* they should have.

How can I do a user controlled amount of subvi instances?

Hello!
I'm trying to write a dynamic application where the user can control which sub-vis get selected to run in parallel. The problem I am having is that each sub-vi has it's own never ending while-loop, and that the execution of the first one prevents the execution of others. See the example attached.
Now I know at first glance you may say, "Why use the for-loop? Why not just have the two knobs control seperate conditional statements instead of an array that controls a single conditional inside a for-loop?" The answer to that is because in my application, the size of the Control array that spawn sub-vis gets selected by them also!* So I'm trying to take advantage of the for-loop's auto-indexing ability to spawn as many sub-vi instances as there are knobs in the Control array.
An alternative I thought of was to simply execute all the sub-vi's, and have the Control array simply select the correct outputs (outputs not demonstrated in the example attached), but I am running this in Real-Time on a FieldPoint unit, and the processor overhead of running all the sub-vi's that are not necessary will hurt my performance.
If you can understand the problem I am presenting (I may not be completely clear) and have a better way to spawn sub-vi's with internal while loops controlled by an array , I'd appreciate your help!
Thank You
*I'm doing this because the job I am working on will need to be modifiable after my contract is over, and the potential of expansion after I am gone is highly desired my my employer. Sure, I'd rather be rehired to change the code everytime changes are needed, but that's obvously not the best solution for my employer.
Attachments:
one_selected.vi ‏13 KB
example.vi ‏18 KB
zero_selected.vi ‏14 KB

Awesome. I'll do that!

HP Printer Control app for Windows 8

HP Printer Control enables you to set up and access your connected HP printers.
We hope that the HP Printer Control app enriches your experience with HP printers and Windows 8. Please tell us about your experience -- what you like, what you don’t like, issues you may encounter, and areas where we could make the app better for you.
For more information, visit the HP Printer Control App support document.
Supported Printers:
HP Color LaserJet CM1300 MFP
HP Color LaserJet CM2320 MFP
HP Color LaserJet CM3530 MFP
HP Color LaserJet CM4540 MFP
HP Color LaserJet CP1510
HP Color LaserJet CP2025
HP Color LaserJet CP4025
HP Color LaserJet CP4525
HP Color LaserJet CP5220
HP Color LaserJet CP5520 Series
HP Color LaserJet CP6015
HP Color LaserJet Pro MFP M176
HP Color LaserJet Pro MFP M177
HP Deskjet 1000 J110 series
HP Deskjet 1010 series
HP Deskjet 1050 J410 series Scan
HP Deskjet 1510 series
HP Deskjet 2000 J210 series
HP Deskjet 2020 series
HP Deskjet 2050 J510 series Scan
HP Deskjet 2510 series Scan
HP Deskjet 2520 series Scan
HP Deskjet 2540 series
HP Deskjet 2640 series
HP Deskjet 3000 J310 series
HP Deskjet 3050 J610 series
HP Deskjet 3050A J611 series
HP Deskjet 3070 B611 series
HP Deskjet 3510 series
HP Deskjet 3520 series
HP Deskjet 3540 series
HP Deskjet 4510 series
HP Deskjet 4610 series Scan
HP Deskjet 4620 series
HP Deskjet 4640 series
HP Deskjet 5520 series
HP Deskjet 6520 series
HP Deskjet F4500 series
HP Deskjet Ink Adv 2010 K010
HP Deskjet Ink Adv 2060 K110 Scan
HP Deskjet Ink Advant K209a-z
HP Deskjet Ink Advantage K209a-z and K209g
HP Envy 100 D410 series
HP ENVY 110 series
HP ENVY 120 series
HP ENVY 4500 series
HP ENVY 5530 series
HP LaserJet 100 color MFP M175
HP LaserJet 200 color M251
HP LaserJet 200 color MFP M275
HP LaserJet 200 color MFP M276
HP LaserJet 400 M401
HP LaserJet 400 MFP M425
HP LaserJet 500 color MFP M570
HP LaserJet 600 M601 M602 M603
HP LaserJet Enterprise 500 color M551
HP LaserJet Enterprise 700 color MFP M775
HP LaserJet Enterprise 700 M712
HP LaserJet Enterprise color flow MFP M575
HP LaserJet Enterprise flow MFP M525
HP LaserJet Enterprise flow MFP M830
HP LaserJet Enterprise M4555 MFP
HP LaserJet Enterprise M806
HP LaserJet Enterprise MFP M725
HP LaserJet M1522 MFP
HP LaserJet M9040 MFP
HP LaserJet M9050 MFP
HP LaserJet P1100
HP LaserJet P1566
HP LaserJet P1600
HP LaserJet P2050
HP LaserJet P3010
HP LaserJet P4000
HP LaserJet P4010
HP LaserJet Pro CM1415
HP LaserJet Pro CP1020
HP LaserJet Pro CP1520
HP LaserJet Pro M1536dnf MFP
HP LaserJet Pro MFP M125-M126
HP LaserJet Pro MFP M127-M128
HP LaserJet Pro MFP M435
HP LaserJet Pro MFP M521
HP LaserJet Professional M1132 MFP
HP LJ300-400 color M351-M451
HP LJ300-400 color MFP M375-M475
HP Officejet 100 Mobile L411
HP Officejet 150 Mobile L511
HP Officejet 2620 series
HP Officejet 4500 All-in-One G510g to m
HP Officejet 4500 G510a-f
HP Officejet 4500 G510g-m
HP Officejet 4500 G510n-z
HP Officejet 4500 Wireless All-in-One G510n to z
HP Officejet 4610 series Scan
HP Officejet 4620 series
HP Officejet 4630 series
HP Officejet 6100
HP Officejet 6500 E710a-f
HP Officejet 6500 E710n-z
HP Officejet 6600
HP Officejet 6700
HP Officejet 7000 E809a
HP Officejet 7000 Wide Format Printer
HP Officejet 7110 series
HP Officejet 7500 E910
HP Officejet 7610 series
HP Officejet Pro 251dw Printer
HP Officejet Pro 276dw MFP
HP Officejet Pro 3110
HP Officejet Pro 3610
HP Officejet Pro 3620
HP Officejet Pro 8100
HP Officejet Pro 8500 A910
HP Officejet Pro 8600
HP Officejet Pro X451dn Printer
HP Officejet Pro X451dw Printer
HP Officejet Pro X476dn MFP
HP Officejet Pro X476dw MFP
HP Officejet Pro X551dw Printer
HP Officejet Pro X576dw MFP
HP Photosmart 5510 series
HP Photosmart 5510d series
HP Photosmart 5520 series
HP Photosmart 6510 series
HP Photosmart 6520 series
HP Photosmart 7510 series
HP Photosmart 7520 series
HP Photosmart B010 series
HP Photosmart B109a-m
HP Photosmart C4600 series
HP Photosmart C4700 series
HP Photosmart Ink Adv K510
HP Photosmart Plus B209a-m
HP Photosmart Plus B210 series
HP Photosmart Premium C309a-f
HP Photosmart Premium C309g-m
HP Photosmart Premium C309g-n
HP Photosmart Premium Web C309n-s
HP Photosmart Wireless B109n-z
I work for HP.
Say "Thanks" by clicking the Kudos Star in the post that helped you.
Please mark the post that solves your problem as "Accepted Solution".

Hi qunbea,
Have you tried using the HP Printer Install Wizard or downloading the printer drivers and software from hp.com?
Supported Printers for Windows 8 and Windows 8.1
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c03168175&lc=en&cc=us&destPage=document&dlc=en
If your full printer model is "HP Photosmart e-All-in-One Printer - D110a" then here is the link to download the software from hp.com.
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareCategory?cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en&product=4023246&task=&
- Carolyn
Although I am an HP employee, I am speaking for myself and not for HP.
* Click the KUDOS star on the left to say “thanks” for helping!
* Please mark a reply “Accept as Solution” if it solved your issue so others can find it.

Report Developer Control Of Applying Hints to Analytics Queries

There are numerous ways to apply hints to the queries generated by Analytics:
- Table level
- Join level
- Evaluate calculation
Each has its advantages and drawbacks.
- Table level: applies the hint to every query that references the table.
- Join level: applies the hint whenever the join is used in the query.
- Evaluate: allows the report developer to include a hint, but can't control where Analytics decides to apply the hint.
I propose another method for the report developer to apply hints, when needed, that uses join level hints. All the report developer
does is add the hint column to the Answer or add a filter based on the hint column to the Answer to apply the hint.
Setup
NOTE: I suggest you do consistency checks along the way, especially before starting work in the next Layer, to be sure that all setup errors are resolved early.
1) Start by defining a Logical SQL table in the Physical Layer using the following SQL: Select 1 Hint from dual
2) Alias this table for each hint to be defined for report developer usage. As an example, alias the hint table, creating
No Star and Parallel alias tables.
3) Join each alias to the physical layer fact tables, using a complex join, where the hint could be applied. In the Join definition screen, put the hint in the HINT field and enter 1=1 for
in the Expression section. Yes, we are creating a cartesian join between the hint and the other joining table. As the hint table always returns one and only one row, there
is no effect on the rows returned by the query. For No Star, you
put NO_STAR_TRANSFORMATION in the Hint field. For Parallel, you put PARALLEL(<physical table name>, default, default), where the physical table name
is the name of the actual database table, not the name of the alias table (Analytics will put the alias in the place of the database table name
when it generates the SQL). Additionally, for hints that have no parameters, you only need to join it
to the Fact tables in a query and not necessarily the dimensions. If you include fields from multiple fact tables, the hint will be applied
for each fact table. So, you may see the hint multiple times in the SQL (something like SELECT /*+ NO_STAR_TRANSFORMATION NO_STAR_TRANSFORMATION */ t00001.col1...)
4) Add the hint alias tables to the BMM Layer.
5) Rename the Hint field in each of the BMM hint tables to identify the hint being applied. For No Star, change the column name from Hint to No Star Hint. For Parallel,
change the column name from Hint to Parallel Hint.
6) Set the hint column as a key.
7) Join the BMM hint tables to the appropriate fact tables, using a complex join.
8) Define each hint table as a dimension.
9) Set the Logical Level in the Content tab in each of the sources of the joined tables to use the Detail of the hint dimension.
10) Create a folder in the Presentation Layer called Hints
11) Place each BMM hint field into the Presentation Layer Hints folder.
To apply a hint to your Answer, either add the Hint field to your Answer or create a filter where the Hint field is equal to/is in 1 (the number one). Check that the SQL generated
contains the hint, in Answers, go into Administration, Session Manager, and view the log for the user (the user log level will need to have been set to 7 to see the SQL generated).
Use of hints in more complex setups can be done by performing a setup of the hints that is parallel to the fact table setup. As an example, if you specify fragmentation content and a where
clause in your BMM for your fact tables, you would setup parallel physical layer hint tables and joins, BMM objects and joins, fragmentation content, and where clauses based on the
hint tables (only hint tables are referenced in the where clause).
As any database person knows, hints can either help or degrade the performance of queries. So, taking the SQL of the pre-hint Answer and figuring out which hints give the best
performance is suggested, prior to adding the hint fields/filters to the Answer.

Hi Oliver,
I would suggest you to have a look at the below WLST script which would give you the required report of the active threads and it would be send an email too.
Topic: Sending Email Alert for Threads Pool Health Using WLST
http://middlewaremagic.com/weblogic/?p=5433
Topic: Sending Email Alert for Hogger Threads Count Using WLST
http://middlewaremagic.com/weblogic/?p=5423
Also you can use the below script in case of the stuck threads, this script would send you an email with the thread dumps during the issue occurred.
Topic: Sending Email Alert For Stuck Threads With Thread Dumps
http://middlewaremagic.com/weblogic/?p=5582
Regards,
Ravish Mody

Usb-6009 high-speed continuous acquisition for slow control loop application

Hi,
After watching a few Youtube videos, I successfully built a control loop in LabVIEW using my USB-6009. Currently, this loop is limited by the speed my actuator can take and respond to commands, topping out at 200 Hz. This is completely sufficient for my application. My question is more regarding the wasted potential of the USB-6009 to acquire samples at a much higher rate than what would be obtained if I used a simple single sample-on-demand during every iteration of the loop.
It seems to me that having the USB-6009 continuously acquire samples and having my control loop periodically check in for the latest data when it is ready to execute would have the advantage of allowing me to average groups of samples together to lower the overall noise associated with the measurement process (I am reading voltages from an amplified photodiode).
1) Does anyone know how I would instruct the USB-6009 to continuously acquire at say 10 kHz, so that on each loop I will have 50 or so samples that can be averaged together for a more accurate measurement of my control variable? Unfortunately, I'm new to this and not too familiar with DAQmx Timing.vi.
2) I've heard that reading into a buffer can increase latency for moving data into the computer. Given the low speed of my control loop, I don't foresee this as being a problem. Is this a correct assumption? I can probably live with an extra millisecond of latency.
3) I goofed around briefly with DAQmx Timing and managed to see a buffer overflow error. Certain rare events will by necessity cause my control loop to take much longer to execute, so I cannot guarantee that occasionally during normal operation I will not overflow the buffer. Can I suppress this error so that the dialog box does not pop up and the program continues to run uninterrupted? If the buffer overflows and old data gets overwritten it isn't a big deal for me since the control loop is only concerned with the latest data anyway.
Thanks for any info!

Howdy Patrick!
Here is a picture of the front panel:
Here is the block diagram:
And I've attached a copy of the VI saved for LabVIEW 7.1.
Regards,
Barron
Applications Engineering
National Instruments
Attachments:
most recent samples.vi ‏73 KB

RT multi-motor motion control in a closed loop system

Hello NI Community,
We have 12 stepper motors with load cells attached in line on each motor that are connected to a RT PXI chassis. We use an optical system to gather 3D data on the host computer which is used to calculate relative angles between 2 connected objects. This data is passed to the RT target as one of several feedback based control strategies that are used (relative angles, force on each load cell, motor position, etc.). Our Labview code is setup to utilize any of these control strategies for any motor, often using multiple strategies for different motors at the same time. The code deployed to our RT target is currently a single timed loop that incorporates the load cell reads, PID control calculations, motor command writes and position reads. In determining the timing of this loop we find it to be ~18Hz. We would like to integrate a new control strategy that is inefficient below 30Hz and are trying to determine how we can achieve this. It seems that our limiting factor is the constant writing/reading of each motor at ~4.6ms/motor, although this doesn't seem correct with the posted 62us speeds shown in the specs for the motion controllers. I'm not sure if this there is a setting that I am missing somewhere that is preventing me from achieving these speeds or if this is a function limitation of our hardware setup. We would like to achieve this with all 12 motors, although not all motors are always in use. The PXI components we are using are listed below.
PXI-1050 Chassis
PXI-8105 RT Controller
PXI-7344 Motion Controllers
UMI-7774 Motion Interface
Would any of the following be more advantageous than the others or is there another method someone has found useful in speeding up their systems.
Split motor read/write into another timed loop with a higher priority over the PID loop. (deterministic approach)
Create a unique read/write loop for each of the 3 Motion Controllers
Create boolean activation to ensure only the motors that are being used are incorporated in the control scheme
Sorry for the long post but I wanted to make sure I included as many details as possible. Thank you in advance for your help with this.
Brian

Hey,
Have you tried diagnosing where the problem is by seperating the processes and timing them to see what is causing the delay of the motor control to ~5ms?
Regards,
A. Zaatari
National Instruments
Applications Engineer

Control Advantages

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for