Logical architecture+best practice

Hi,
what does these mean for you regading Oracle applications :
1-logical architecture
2-best practice
Regards.

1-logical architecture -> I assume the technical architecture for deployment of Oracle Applications (Single node, multi node, HA, DMZ configuration etc)
2-best practice -> Best Practices in each function within maintaining and implementing Oracle Applications.. like best practice for Upgrades, Coning Patching etc
Sam
http://www.appsdbablog.com

Similar Messages

  • JEE5 Application Architecture Best Practice.

    Hi Everybody
    I am going to redesign a moderate size application (not v big but larger then normal).
    Now I have few Question in my mind.
    I am using JSF as front-end, EJB3 Session Bean for Business Logic and last but not the least JPA as domain model.
    1 - With JPA we have a domain classes. Now its better to use entity as manage-bean for JSF or manage bean should be saperate.
    2 - Using DTO (Data Transfer Object) is good practice or not in JEE5.
    3 - Simplicity or Complexity but with EntityManager I feel no need of DAO but I am used to with DAO pattern. So again as best practice I have to make 1 session bean as DAO and call it from all the session bean where I write business logic or forget about DAO session bean and call EntityManager from all session bean everywhere.
    4 - For initializing EJB JNDI is 1 way other way is
    @EJB EJBCLASSNAME ejbclassobject; //this auto initialize and create object.
    Initializing like above is standard or it is an extended support from some app server.

    Hi,
    Follow my opinion:
    1 - With JPA we have a domain classes. Now its better to use entity as manage-bean for JSF or manage bean should be saparated.
    >> I think that Managed-Bean must be separated, because you can need to bind you Visual Components to it too.
    2 - Using DTO (Data Transfer Object) is good practice or not in JEE5.
    >> You can put your Entity as a member of you Managed Bean.
    3 - Simplicity or Complexity but with EntityManager I feel no need of DAO but I am used to with DAO pattern. So again as best practice I have to make 1 session bean as DAO and call it from all the session bean where I write business logic or forget about DAO session bean and call EntityManager from all session bean everywhere.
    >> For CRUD operation I don't create a additional class, but for complex business logic, you can use a separated class (Business Manager)
    Best regards

  • Where to put java code - Best Practice

    Hello. I am working with the Jdeveloper 11.2.2. I am trying to figure out the best practice for where to put code. After reviewing http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26098_01/web.1112/e16182.pdf it seemed like the application module was the preferred spot (although many of the examples in the pdf are in main methods). After coding a while though, I noticed that there were quite a few libraries imported, and wondered whether this would impact performance.
    I reviewed postings on the forum, especially Re: Access service method (client interface) programmatically . This link mentions accessing code from a backing bean -- and the gist of the recommendations seems to be to use the data control to drag it to the JSF, or use the bindings to access code.
    My interest lies in where to put java code in the first place; In the View Object, Entity Object, and Am object, backing bean.....other?
    I can outline several best guesses about where to put code and the pros and cons:
    1. In the application module
    Pros: Centralized location for code makes development and support more simple as there are not multiple access points. Much like a data control centralizes services, the application module can act as a conduit for different pieces of code you have in objects in your model.
    Cons: Everything in one place means the application module becomes bloated. I am not sure how memory works in java -- if the app module has tons of different libraries are they all called when even a simple query re-execute method is called? Memory hog?
    2. Write code in the objects it affects. If you are writing code that accesses a view object, write it in a view object. Then make it visible to the client.
    pros: The code is accessed via fewer conduits (for example, I would expect that if you call the application module from a JSF backing bean, then the application module calls the view object, you have three different pieces of code --
    conts: The code gets spread out, harder to locate etc.
    I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the matter.
    Regards,
    Stuart
    Edited by: Stuart Fleming on May 20, 2012 5:25 AM
    Edited by: Stuart Fleming on May 20, 2012 5:27 AM

    First point here is when you say "where to put the java code" and you're referring to ADF BC, the point is you put "business logic java code" in the ADF Business Components. It's fine of course to have Java code in the ViewController layer that deals with the UI layer. Just don't put business logic in the UI layer, and don't put UI logic in the model layer. In your 2 examples you seem to be considering the ADF BC layer only, so I'll assume you mean business logic java code only.
    Meanwhile I'm not keen on the term best practice as people follow best practices without thinking, typically best practices come with conditions and people forget to apply them. Luckily you're not doing that here as you've thought through the pros and cons of each (nice work).
    Anyway, back on topic and off my soap box, as for where to put your code, my thoughts:
    1) If you only have 1 or 2 methods put it in the AppModuleImpl
    2) If you have hundreds of methods, or there's a chance #1 above will morph into #2, split the code up between the AppModuleImpl, ViewImpl and ViewRowImpls. Why? Because your AM will become overloaded with hundreds of methods making it unreadable. Instead put the code where it should logically go. Methods that work on a specific VO row go into the associated ViewRowImpl, methods that work across rows in a VO go into the ViewImpl, and methods that work across VOs in the associated AppModuleImpl.
    To be honest which you ever option you choose, one thing I do recommend as a best practice is be consistent and document the standard so your other programmers know.
    Btw there isn't an issue about loading lots of libraries/imports into a class, it has no runtime cost. However if your methods require lots of class variables, then yes this will have a memory cost.
    On a side note if you're interested in more ideas around how to build ADF apps correctly think about joining the "ADF EMG", a free online forum which discusses ADF architecture, best practices (cough), deployment architectures and more.
    Regards,
    CM.

  • Standby best practices

    Hi,
    1. Primary and Standby databases should be on different servers.
    2. The version of the OS of the primary and standby database should be the same.
    I know these two points are logical and best practices. Now my management wants to implement the setup on different flavours of AIX (5.3 and 6.1). I have already tried to convince that above two points are best practices, but they require some oracle documentation where it is mentioned.
    I tried searching some authentic documents, but couldn't locate. Has anybody some document to support the above two points?
    Thanks in advance.

    let me know your email id, i can send you my pdf's which i have.
    Here are AlejandroVargas notes
    blogs.oracle.com/.../gems/DataGuardPhysicalStandbystep.pdf
    blogs.oracle.com/.../How-to-open-the-standby-when-the-primary-is-lost.pdf
    blogs.oracle.com/.../How-To-Synchronize-Standby-When-Logs-Lost.pdf
    blogs.oracle.com/AlejandroVargas/gems/PhysicalStandbyActivatedRead.pdf
    blogs.oracle.com/.../how_to_synchronize_the_standby.html
    blogs.oracle.com/.../how_to_manually_open_the_stand.html
    http://www.google.com/search?q=standby&sitesearch=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.oracle.com%2FAlejandroVargas%2F
    www.dba-oracle.com/t_standby_redo_log_recovery.htm
    blogs.oracle.com/.../gems/DataGuardBrokerandobserverst.pdf
    Creating a Standby Database on a new host [ID 374069.1]
    do Log Corruption While Using Netapps Filesystem With Default Setting of Filesystemio_options Parameter [ID 437005.1]
    Edited by: 3Amigos on Dec 13, 2010 2:43 AM

  • Best practices for JavaFX architecture and patterns?

    Hi,
    I want to write reusable, easy to maintain JavaFX code for a larger UI project and wonder what are the best practices doing so.
    1) Are there preferred UI patterns? MVC, MVP, Presentation Model, ...?
    2) Does it make sense to use FXML to separate View from Logic? Or should I use 2-3 Java classes instead (one for View, one for Logic, one for Domain Model, depending on the pattern)
    3) How to organize all the views? Should I use Dependency Injection? Or Singletons for each view? Spring or Guice framework, if at all?
    Currently I use singletons for most views, so that I can use them from anywhere in my application. If a window is closed and opened again, I use the same instance for that, which still resists in memory.
    For patterns, I try to lean on Presentation Model, since this is what I know from Flex development: Having a View layer, which contains all the UI stuff and an abstract view layer, which holds properties, that describe the View, e.g. submitButtonDisabledProperty. The View knows the abstract layer (Presentation Model), but not vice versa and the UI elements are bound to its properties.
    I am unsure if this is appropriate for JavaFX, too (for Flex or Silverlight it is).
    What are your recommendations / experiences for large UI projects?

    You are correct that in 'pure' MVP the View should know as little about it's presenter implementation as possible. The view should just notify one or more 'listeners' that something has happened.
    You can use event listeners for this, but I would highly recommend not exposing your Control-specific GUI events and instead create your own. So for example, don't expose ActionEvent or MouseEvent as these expose too much detail about your View's implementation, instead create 'semantic' events, so you might have something like 'sayHelloRequested' or 'printOptionSelected' (whatever naming system you want). This hides how the option is implemented, so you might have a 'print' button, a 'print' menu option, a CTRL+P print shortcut, or a double tap anywhere on your screen to print. The listener knows only that the view thinks 'print was requested by the user' - decoupling achieved.
    Once you start doing this however you end up with an explosion of event listener interfaces. So say a view has 10 callbacks it wants to notify about, then you end up with 10 interfaces, and if you're being really pure you also end up with 10 'Event' beans (or DTOs) to encapsulate the details of that event. It starts to get ungainly even for a semi-purist like me. So the logical progression from there is usually just to define all 10 callbacks in one interface and call it something like MyViewListener.
    There are two common ways to implement listeners, the traditional way is to allow an arbitrary number of listeners to be added. Whereas another option is to allow only a single listener to be added. In JFX you will notice that Button for example has a setOnAction() method not a addOnAction() method - it allows a single event handler only and let's face it this is generally fine in 95% of cases. For the remaining 5% you can just write your own aggregate event handler that dispatches the event to multiple listeners.
    So if we go down the road of single event listeners, using an interface for all of the callbacks and not bothering with full 'Event' objects, you end up with something like this:
    public interface MyViewListener {
        void printRequested();
        void doSomething(int someParam);   
        void doSomethingElse(String someOtherParam);   
    }And if you look closely at the 'Purist' option in my MVP pattern where I define interfaces for everything, then you will see that this is pretty much the exact interface I've created for the 'Presenter'. You could just as easily rename this interface to MyViewListener in this pattern and have the same outcome.
    So to wrap all that up, yes, the Presenter should be decoupled and I highly favour the 'purist' option in my blog and would definitely use it if FXML didn't dictate a impure design pattern (there are some ongoing discussions about this on the OpenJFX discussion group). And, yes, my 'purist' option could be even more pure if you went for the full-blown event callback model and if you go down that road you will have an extremely clean architecture but also an extremely large code-base - totally your call whether it's worth it.
    It's also worth remembering in all this, that there are a lot of people from a lot of different backgrounds using JFX and some people hate (passionately) even my semi-pure option - especially those coming from other, less heavy-weight languages. They just don't get why you wouldn't build it all into one class and reduce the overheads. So what you have in my blog is my thoughts on it, other people will most definitely differ. I'm a big fan of developer's choice, and that's why I did the smorgasboard approach even though I personally would never use some of those implementations.
    Also this video on GWT is an awesome reference on GUI design patterns: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDuhR18-EdM
    JFX Flow draws a lot from GWT as I think it is a very clean architecture (just such a shame that they put all that effort into hiding the horrid, sordid mess that is the web+html+css, instead of making something proper, like JFX).
    Hope that helps,
    zonski

  • High demand architecture, large reports, distributed printing, best practic

    Hi,
    I have a client with high demand for printing reports in different country regions and large reports (10000 pages some of them), today they are doing this with Oracle Reports, but the server regularly gets overloaded and some reports never complete. They use reports in PDF format.
    Can you please suggest an appropriate architecture for this scenario. Or refer some documentation on Best Practices for high demand and distributed reporting?.
    Case description
    They have a centralized Reports Server and reports are used in different remote regions of the country.
    Some reportrs have 6 pages and others may be more than 10.000 pages.
    Reports server has communication with some remote facilities at 10 mbps, and some regional offices at 10mbps, but most offices connect at 512 o 1024 bps.
    The idea would be having reports like "client reports" in the offices and request only "Data" to the server, so they can reduce network traffic, they believe most problems come from the fact that Reports Server sends heavy PDF thru the network causing lags and fails, some reports never complete, they have to resend them.
    Some othes ideas also include : Reduce the business logic placed into reports, use of regional servers, or even they have thought in changing Reports for another tool.
    Any comment or suggestion would be appreciated.
    Thanks in advance for your attention.

    i think better way is to keep business logic into database and generate ur reports using Forms(Oracle forms) based parameter forms and save results into temporary tables
    show some progress bar status on ur forms so it will be easy for users how long they have to wait for report to generate
    in reports there should not by anything more than select * from mytemptables
    Baig,
    [My Oracle Blog|http://baigsorcl.blogspot.com/]

  • Logical level in Fact tables - best practice

    Hi all,
    I am currently working on a complex OBIEE project/solution where I am going straight to the production tables, so the fact (and dimension) tables are pretty complex since I am using more sources in the logical tables to increase performance. Anyway, what I am many times struggling with is the Logical Levels (in Content tab) where the level of each dimension is to be set. In a star schema (one-to-many) this is pretty straight forward and easy to set up, but when the Business Model (and physical model) gets more complex I sometimes struggle with the aggregates - to get them work/appear with different dimensions. (Using the menu "More" - "Get levels" does not allways give the best solution......far from). I have some combinations of left- and right outer join as well, making it even more complicated for the BI server.
    For instance - I have about 10-12 different dimensions - should all of them allways be connected to each fact table? Either on Detail or Total level. I can see the use of the logical levels when using aggregate fact tables (on quarter, month etc.), but is it better just to skip the logical level setup when no aggregate tables are used? Sometimes it seems like that is the easiest approach...
    Does anyone have a best practice concerning this issue? I have googled for this but I haven't found anything good yet. Any ideas/articles are highly appreciated.

    Hi User,
    For instance - I have about 10-12 different dimensions - should all of them always be connected to each fact table? Either on Detail or Total level.It not necessary to connect to all dimensions completely based on the report that you are creating ,but as a best practice we should maintain all at Detail level only,when you are mentioning any join conditions in physical layer
    for example for the sales table if u want to report at ProductDimension.ProductnameLevel then u should use detail level else total level(at Product,employee level)
    Get Levels. (Available only for fact tables) Changes aggregation content. If joins do not exist between fact table sources and dimension table sources (for example, if the same physical table is in both sources), the aggregation content determined by the administration tool will not include the aggregation content of this dimension.
    Source admin guide(get level definition)
    thanks,
    Saichand.v

  • Best practice architecture Wireless security

    What is the best practice architecture for wireless to the wire network?
    Use AP to Firewall and it to a router using RADIUS?
    It apply to Control is a safety?
    What models Cisco recomend (Hard and Soft?)
    Is any place in Cisco that I can use to see Architecture recomendations that integrete Wireless, Radio (Microwave) and Voice over IP com-plete system?

    using one of the 802.1x types (i.e. LEAP, EAP-FAST, PEAP) with WPAv2 (AES encryption). Too bad that there are not many wireless adapters support AES.
    All Cisco wireless product support AES in 12.3(2)JA recently.
    Also, you may want to configure WDS for radio management.

  • Best Practice Question - Business Logic in Value Objects?

    Just wondering what people's thoughts on best practices for setting properties of Value Objects.
    For instance, I have several getter/setters in one of my Value Objects with logic in the setter that uses the value to set values of other properties.
    For example, I have a Value Object that has the following properties:
    category (of type Category, which is another Value Object with properties "name" and "id")
    categoryId (of type int)
    categoryUpdated (of type Boolean)
    I have a collection of Category Objects in the Model. When I set the categoryId of this class, I set the "categoryUpdated" to true, and dispatch an CairngormEvent to that find the "category" with the specified "categoryId" and set the "category" property to this item.
    So what is the best practice? To simply make the "categoryId" a public variable, and create a new Event/Command to perform all this logic? Or is it ok to do it all in the Value Object setter?
    Thanks.

    Hi Eric,
    I can't speak for best practices, but the only logic I've ever added to a VO were getters: an example was a set of getters on an airline flight VO to get overall flight departure/arrival times/cities from an array of flight segments in a property of the VO.
    I feel uneasy (in the nicest possible way) about your VO for two reasons: firstly it has a strong dependency on bits of the Cairngorm framework to look up the category (and VOs normally don't need to depend on anything), and secondly the intent of Commands in Cairngorm is more to represent user gestures than to wire up VO properties (I often see people shoehorning stuff into Commands that might be better of as plain old business utility classes). I would rather see an UpdateCategoryCommand (that's what the user is trying to do?) that updates categoryId and hits a delegate to populate the category property.
    That said you might have a very good reason for doing this. Could you tell us where the code is that's setting categoryId, and if anything is using categoryUpdated?
    Cheers,
    Robin

  • EFP and Intranet Portal - Best Practices for architecture

    Hi All,
       We are planning to create a portal for our partners  (b2b scenario). This portal will provide anonymous  and user specific access. We also have a intranet portal with ESS and MSS.  I have some doubts around implementing EFP and Intranet portal.
       1) What is the best practice solution architecture around portal instances? Is it suggested to implement both intranet and internal portals on same portal instance? Do you implement them as 2 seperate instances (and 2 seperate boxes) one for intranet and another for internet?
       2) There are couple of functions shared between inranet and internet portals. Has any one attempted   a FPN connection between a internet portal and intranet portal?
       3)  What is the best practices around an external portal connecting to ECC directly?
    Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

    Hi Pallayya,
             We are implementing a similar kind of thing for our client.I can explain that so you find some glimpse out of it.
    We have decided twp ways.
    1) We are having one instance of the portal that will be accessed both in Intranet & Internet.We are using two different URL for intranet & internet.We have a reverse proxy in the picture also,coz it will increase the security of the portal in the Internet.The reverse proxy will be available in the DMZ Zone.We have integrated ECC & BW with the portal and some web dynpro application(For intranet only).
    Now the user comes from the Internet will hit the reverse proxy first->then it will go to EP Server->in EP it will be decided which kind of request client is asking ->
    If it is a ECC request->Portal Server sends back the request to Reverse Proxy->RP will send it to web dispatcher->Then it will go to ECC.
    If it is a BW request ->Portal server sends the request to BW Server.
    2) There will be two different URLS for the portal in Intranet & Internet
         For that we used two reverse proxy
    regards
    Indranil

  • Hyperion - best practice architecture

    we are planning to use the hyperion 11x (HFM and Planning and Financial Reports) and would like to know the best practice architecture and the oracle doucment id on this.
    any help would be much appreciated
    Thanks

    If you want to understand the architecture recommended by Oracle then have a look at the standard deployment guide at - http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17236_01/nav/portal_1.htm
    If you don't want to go down the recommended route then I suggest getting in a consultant to discuss your possible options.
    Cheers
    John
    http://john-goodwin.blogspot.com/

  • Best Practices & Strategy Planning for SAP BI Architecture

    What are best practices and strategy planning that SAP BI Architect should know?
    What are the challenges are involved with this role ?
    What are the other information that this Architect should know to deliver the robust BI solution?
    Is there any white papers on the best practices on Architecture & Data Modeling, please ?
    Thanks,
    Venkat.

    Hi
    As per the Best Practice  first load the master and next transaction data .
    Please find the link for best practices
    http://www.sap.com/services/pdf/BWP_SAP_Best_Practices_for_Business_Intelligence.pdf.
    Regarding the architecture it depend upon the size of volumen and how much frequency  your load and  hard ware sizing
    based on this  we can provide best  solution
    If you any issues please let me know
    Regards
    Madan

  • Best Practice: Keeping business logic out of the servlet

    In servlet programming, is it considered best practice keep business logic in the helper classes and only have session-related logic in the servlet?

    Yes, it is best to keep your business logic separate from your servlet class, to prevent coupling between your servlet and business logic. Consider using EJB's or the DAO pattern for your business logic.

  • Teststand best practices architecture for communicating with TCP instruments

    Hi,
    I am using Teststand 2014 and LabVIEW 2013 SP1 as the module adapter.
    My Teststand sequence file includes communication with 3-5 different instruments via TCP/IP.
    Such as Spectrum analyzer, generator and other RF measurement devices.
    There are many steps located in subsequences that implement code to communicated with these devices whether to fetch , query or write.
    What is the best architecture to implement this program ?
    As I can see it there are many possibilities, such as :
    1. Launching a subsequence as a new thread in the Sequence Setup. This subsequence calls a VI that dynamically register for events/queue that can be launched from any step. (in this case there is a VI running in the background that can perform Write/Read/Qurey to the instrument and he is triggered from any step using an event or dequeue element)
    This option can be duplicated for any instrument or only once for all of the instrument with prioritizing the event queue.
    2. Creating a communication reference in the Setup of the Main Sequence. And passing it to any step that need it. (there is also the question how to pass this reference… in Teststand globals or in LabVIEW queue).    
    another 2 small questions that I encountered -
    Is using LabVIEW queues and notifiers in TS steps and obtaining their reference (in the LabVIEW code) by name is considered best practices ?
    If I would like to run only one VI in a new thread, should I use a new subsequnce and set it as a new thread or use the Run VI Asynchronously ? what are the differences ?

    I use Action Engines to hold my VISA Sessions and just write my LabVIEW VIs to use those to send commands and read data.  Any returned data can be analyzed in the VI or passed on to TestStand as a step result.  You just need a sequence to run at start up to initialize your Action Engines and another one to close them.
    There are only two ways to tell somebody thanks: Kudos and Marked Solutions
    Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines

  • Architecture/Design Question with best practices ?

    Architecture/Design Question with best practices ?
    Should I have separate webserver, weblogic for application and for IAM ?
    If yes than how this both will communicate, for example should I have webgate at both the server which will communicate each other?
    Any reference which help in deciding how to design and if I have separate weblogic one for application and one for IAM than how session management will occur etc
    How is general design happens in IAM Project ?
    Help Appreciated.

    The standard answer: it depends!
    From a technical point of view, it sounds better to use the same "midleware infrastructure", BUT then the challenge is to find the lastest weblogic version that is certified by both the IAM applications and the enterprise applications. This will pull down the version of weblogic, since the IAM application stack is certified with older version of weblogic.
    From a security point of view (access, availability): do you have the same security policy for the enterprise applications and the IAM applications (component of your security architecture)?
    From a organisation point of view: who is the owner of weblogic, enterprise applications and IAM applications. In one of my customer, application and infrastructure/security are in to different departments. Having a common weblogic domain didn't feet in the organization.
    My short answer would be: keep it separated, this will save you a lot of technical and political challenges.
    Didier.

Maybe you are looking for