Your opinions about workflow

Final Cut Pro is a relatively flexible application with many ways to get to the same outcome. I was just wondering how some of you go about setting up a large project.
For instance I have one where I have about 10 hours of raw footage.
I've set up lots of bins for the various shots and within the bins, I have numerous clips.
I created the clips by opening the tape in the viewer, setting in and out points,then dragging the clip into the particular bin.
then broke the timeline down into several different sequences so I don't have to work on the whole thing at once.
so everything was going great until I realized that the clips are only "references" -- when I try to fit them into the timeline and further adjusted the clip, the clip reference within the bin changes.
so if you have shot notes etc. they become inaccurate when the clips are varied.
okay lets say one shot has +"Jane getting in her car, driving out of the parking lot, all the way back to her house"+.
from all that footage, I created a clip that just shows Jane driving on the highway.
my notes to that clip within the bin have the above explanation (in quotes) but the clip is now just "Jane driving on the highway"
do you guys handle this any differently?
best, M/

M-323 wrote:
so is there anyway to keep the (sub)clips intact in the browser?
Yes, by making them subclips, not just marked sections of a master clip.
The 'correct' procedure would be to mark you subclips in the viewer, making subclips of them by using command+U or the menu command. When you want to edit and you load these subclips in to the viewer and mark new ins and outs these ins and outs will be reflected in the browser but as the subclip will only show the duration of your original subclip you still 'see', and have access to, the shots that your notes refer to and only those shots.
but as I'm going along using those clips, when I fine tune them, the reference in the browser gets readjusted.
Well, if you load the clip into the viewer, mark a new in and out then you've changed the in/out for that clip, so of course the browser will reflect that.
at least if the in and out points would stay the same in the browser, that would be helpful.
That's not possible in any NLE. The media limits can be set, so that only a selected portion is visible when loaded into the viewer, and those will not change regardless of ins/out used. You do this by using the subclip command or capturing your shots individually in the first place. You can move the in and out, but the available material will always be the portion you selected when you subclipped it.

Similar Messages

I'd like to read your opinions about a method.

Hi everyone.
Just want opinions.
If someone tells u that its only going to use the method , what kind of asserts would u use?
They told me that , i must use asserts, but i already have an assert in the main (which is not going to be used by them)
They have their own main to test.
So do i use the same assert in the method , the same that i used in the main method?
here is the method :
public static boolean temMaisAlgarismosDoQueAMediaDosAlgarismos(final int number) {
// the only assert that can be used here is
assert 0 < number : number ;
          return true
        else return false;Is there another assert that i could use ? if yes, which one?
Can't use an assert for the return value , cuz its a loigical (true or false).
Need opinions.
Thank you
Josh

ok here is the method.
Insert a number which will be passed as a parameter .
if the the number of digits is greater than the media of the same digits, return true else false.
e.g : 132 --> Media = 2 number of digits : 3 so return true. simple.
Can i use another assert beside that one?.
public static boolean temMaisAlgarismosDoQueAMediaDosAlgarismos(final int number)
     //Assertion: If (numero <= 0) "Error"
     assert 0 < numero : numero;
          int sum = 0;
          int numero_auxiliar = numero;
          int count = 0;
          int media;
          while (number_aux > 0){
          int digit = number_aux % 10;
          number_aux /= 10;
          sum += digit;
          if(number >= 0) count++;
          media =(int) (sum / count);
          if(count > media)
               return true;
          else
               return false;
     }thks

Opinions about the Mac Mini

Hey!
I wanna know if Mac mini is good performance.
I would like to use it mainly for Web Design (Photoshop) and Video Editing (less than Web Design though)
What's your opinions about it.

Hello,
The Mac Mini is a great computer. And, it is capable of doing everything you are asking about.
But, you will potentially find it less pleasurable to use for intensive graphics work than an iMac.
The Mac Mini uses an Integrated Video system that borrows it's memory from the system's memory. So, it's performance is going to be lower when compared to the iMac.
This primarily affects things being drawn to the screen, not the processing of information / graphics data.
So, you won't find a problem in terms of crunching information and producing stuff. But, you may observe in some situations that the video / pictures being displayed on the screen may lag a bit.
But, you'll usually only notice that in something with a high frame-rate (such as animations) or in 3D drawing or animation.
Otherwise, it's a perfectly fine computer.
It's price is a bit high for the lower performance it offers in comparison to the iMac systems. So, if you really want the best performance and the most for your money, then look towards the iMac.
But, if the performance of the Mac Mini is acceptable to you, and you already have a large monitor that you like, then the Mini may be a good buy for you.
My main complaints are that the CoreDuo model has rather humble specs compared to the iMac and it costs $800 before you add the additional memory that you will definitely want.
The iMac starts at $1299, but comes with a monitor built-in, a much faster microprocessor, a significantly larger hard drive, and a dedicated graphics controller with it's own memory. So, you really get a good deal for your money.
So, the way I see it, the Mini is an excellent computer, but hardly a deal when you compare what you get for your money.
The iMac costs a bit more, but you get a lot for your money.
And, you can always buy a refurbished iMac from Apple, and get the price as low as $1099.
Apple Certified Refurbished Products
Either way you go, you'll get a great computer. You just need to decide how much computer you want for your money.
If you want a system with a large (and fast) hard drive, a fast graphics card, fast processor, and large screen, then go with the iMac.
If you just want a computer that will get the job done, and have your own monitor already, then the Mac Mini may be a good purchase for you.
You should also consider that Adobe has not upgraded their programs to be "Universal" yet. So, they will run using the slower and more demanding "Rosetta" translator built-into OS X.
This means that you will need more memory (to hold the translated code). It also means that the performance of those programs will be slower. So, you'll want the fastest processor you can get (or afford) to help off-set the reduced performance.
Basically, Rosetta is a translator that converts PowerPC code to run on Intel processors. This translated code is stored in memory while you are using the program, and therefore requires more memory to operate. So, you'll observe a decrease in performance if you start running low on memory. So, you'll want as much memory as you can get (1 GB or 2 GB would be preferable).
Additionally, running in Rosetta is slower. So, you'll want a faster processor to help speed things up a bit when using older PowerPC programs.
It has been said that Photoshop will run acceptably on the iMac, but it is noticeably slower. I could only imagine that it would be even slower on the Mac Mini due to it's slower processor.
I hope this helps.

Does anyone have opinions about at

     Does anyone have experience with or opinions about the free McAfee security suite offerd by At&t U-Verse? I would also ask the same about OpenDNS, which seemed to work fine on my old Mac. Thanks

The McAfee product is much worse than useless.
This is a comment on OpenDNS and other public domain-name system (DNS) services, such as Google DNS. You should use such a service if it solves a problem for you, and not if it creates problems you don't already have. To summarize:
1. Using public DNS will probably not make your network faster, and may make it slower.
2. It will probably not stop your browser from being redirected when you try to connect to a valid web address.
3. It will not make you safer from malware attacks.
4. It could cause confidential information to be compromised.
5. It has other privacy implications that you should be aware of.
A DNS server resolves the human-readable "domain name" of an Internet host, such as www.apple.com, to the numerical address by which that host can be reached. The process is analogous to looking up a phone number by name. There is no chance that changing the DNS server you use will have any effect on a network problem not related to name resolution.
There are two valid reasons why you might want to use a public DNS service:
The DNS servers provided by your ISP are misconfigured (perhaps deliberately) or don't perform well.
You have a use for the filtering controls provided by OpenDNS and others.
Although some DNS services are touted as responding faster than others, there will be no noticeable difference if your ISP is delivering what you pay for. Most likely, the difference in response time among the DNS servers available to you is on the order of a hundredth of a second or less. But under some conditions, public DNS will significantly slow down network performance. Here is a case in point.
A content-distribution network (CDN), such as the one used by Apple to deliver software updates and iTunes content, relies on the location of the DNS server to optimize performance. If your query goes to a distant server, you may get slow downloads of Apple content, among other things. From the report of a test carried out by a networking consultant:
We listed 9 CDNs that would benefit from supporting/using edns-client-subnet, and only two actually support edns-client-subnet: CDN77 and ChinaCache. Others, including Akamai, Internap and CDNetworks, do not currently. This really is too bad, because from the performance data we collected, it is clear these CDNs deliver (much) worse performance currently in many countries to Google DNS and OpenDNS users.
Another reason often given for using public DNS is to avoid "redirection," that is, false results from a query for a valid domain name. Ethical ISP's do not intentionally redirect valid DNS queries, though it might happen unintentionally because of a misconfiguration; for example, because the address of a network host has recently changed, or because of a "poisoning" attack on the DNS server. Note that many ISP's may, and OpenDNS certainly will, redirect invalid queries to ad sites, in violation of published standards for DNS.
Recently, a few low-quality commercial ISP's such as "CenturyLink" have taken to deliberately redirecting DNS queries for some domains, such as search engines. Do not tolerate this practice. If your ISP is doing it, then you should demand that the redirection be stopped, or else switch to another ISP.
Some ISP's have been said to route all DNS queries to their own name servers, regardless of where the queries were directed—another intolerable practice. I haven't heard that any commercial ISP is now doing this, but if yours is, you won't be able to use a public DNS service, even if you change the network settings on your computer or router.
Of course, if your Internet access is provided by an employer or institution, rather than by a commercial ISP, then you have to take whatever you get.
The claims on the OpenDNS website that it blocks malware attacks such as "Flashback" are false advertising. A DNS service does not and cannot block anything. All it can do is to selectively refuse to answer queries. It's trivial for a malware attacker to evade such controls. It's just as easy to evade the parental controls offered by OpenDNS. Nevertheless, you may find those control features useful, despite their limitations. Here is an example of an ASC user who had undesirable results from OpenDNS content filtering.
There is one limited exception to the rule that OpenDNS and Google DNS don't improve performance. The "prefetching" performed by modern web browsers, including Safari, may confuse some DNS servers, with the effects described in this Apple Support article. The article suggests testing OpenDNS, Google DNS, or another third-party DNS service as a possible way to overcome the problem.
If you need to switch DNS providers because of a misconfiguration of your ISP's servers, the change will most likely only need to be temporary. The problem may be resolved automatically within a matter of hours.
If you're considering whether to use public DNS, such as OpenDNS, on a long-term basis, you should take into account the privacy implications. As a user of the free service, you are not an OpenDNS customer, and the service provider—a for-profit corporation—doesn't have a contract with you. The marketers to whom OpenDNS sells access and information are its customers.
OpenDNS will know, and store, the address of every Internet server you use from now on. This is from its privacy policy:
When you use our Services, OpenDNS stores certain DNS, IP address and related information about you to improve the quality of our Service, to provide you with Services and for internal business and analysis purposes.
Concerning personal information, the policy states:
...[I]t is disclosed to entities that perform marketing services on our behalf or to other entities with whom we have joint marketing agreements...
You can't opt out of those disclosures. Read the privacy policy carefully and draw your own conclusions. The privacy policy of Google DNS seems to be somewhat more benign, but again, you should judge for yourself.
That's not the worst of it, though. The practice of hijacking nonexistent domains followed by most public DNS services could result in leaking confidential information to a hacker:
For example, consider the "same origin trust model" used for Web cookies. If you're holding a cookie for GOOGLE.COM and you can be fooled into following a link to KJHSDFKJHSKJHMJHER.GOOGLE.COM, and the resulting NXDOMAIN response is remapped into a positive answer to some advertising server, then you're going to send your cookie to that advertising server when you send your HTTP GET request there. Not such a bad thing for a GOOGLE.COM cookie, but a real problem for a BANKOFAMERICA.COM cookie.
NXDOMAIN remapping is not something that only happens when you randomly mistype a domain name. It can be exploited deliberately by malicious links placed on any web page. In the case of OpenDNS, the result would be that a cookie intended for another server would be sent to the OpenDNS web server instead. A rogue OpenDNS employee, or anyone who managed to break into the web server, might then be able to impersonate you on another website. If this scenario seems far-fetched, it's the stuff that network exploits are made of.
See also a brief, and somewhat outdated, critique of OpenDNS on a Harvard Law School blog, with a response from the company's founder.

Preamp racks/Firewire interfaces - your opinions please

For some time now I've been looking at getting the MOTU 896, as it appears to be a great deal and of great quality. However, the more I look at the forums I've noticed that everyone seems to love their presonus stuff a whole lot.
So now for your opinions. . . does anyone have any good info or experience with either one of these? Which do you guys like better? Or are there any other interfaces that you'd pick over either of these two? Thanks a lot.

Its tough, and its all about budget. I wanted to record 16 channels in a live setting, so I went with two firepods. So far, a pretty good experience, though i've had some problems with digital artifacts at random times. Tech support has been pretty good, but we haven't fixed the problem. I've recently discovered that it might be the longer fw cables i bought a while back, not sure yet.
That said, I'm planning on purchasing an Ensemble once it ships with working drivers and someone has tested it. This way, I'll have 4 apogee pre-amps, 4 line inputs (one firepod in hardware mode will feed this) for a total of 8 apogee A/D convertors, then daisy chain my other pod for an additional 8 channels, also clocked by the Ensemble w/ SPDIF. It should make the pods sound even better.
From what I've read on these boards, I would definitely go with RME, Metric halo, or possibly the Ensemble. Haven't heard good things about the 896 pres.
Regardless, you will probably need more pre-amps if you are recording drums, so something like the Presonus Digimax FS or LT will probably be the cheapest option. It really depends on how many pres you need exactly.

Off topic : get some opinions about my personal project

Hi:
This time I want something different. I hope I don't do anything wrong when I ask for your opinions. Please, sorry my grammar.
I make a magazine by my own. My fiance help me with the contents and some articles (technical articles and short histories), but the rest are my own design. This is a personal proyect, not comercial (for now) and I do it like for exploring options and ideas.
I'm sure I make lot of mistakes but I'm sure I do something good nevertheless. So, if you can tell me my mistakes and successes, I'll really thank a lot.
You can download the PDF (it's a little heavy, 207Mb) from our blog (http://virtualmagazineonline.blogspot.com/p/descargas.html). We have an account in Issuu but it's a free one, and have many limitations, by example, we must had to split the file in three parts, and the crossword do not work normally. In the blog you will found 2 editions of my project. The one I want opinions is the second number, May 2013 (Virtual Magazine N° 2 Mayo 2013)
So that's all. Again, sorry my grammar.
Regards from Lima, Perú... and thanks in advance.

I don't know about your question 1 and 2. Seems like it could be a workout that wasn't ended or just a glitch.
What was your goal? It will measure whatever you set it to measure. Calories burned, distance, run more often, etc.
I set a run more often goal of at least 3 times in 16 weeks. It is averaging and making a calculated guess from that average as to when those runs would take place. So if I run three days in a row and not again that week, I will be ahead of my goal, and then the system catches up and I'm on target again.
I imagine it's doing the same for your goal.

I want to learn about workflow any one can provide the guidence for me

i want to learn about workflow any one can provide the guidance for me

SAP Business Workflow can be used to define business processes that are not yet mapped in the R/3 System. These may be simple release or approval procedures, or more complex business processes such as creating a material master and the associated coordination of the departments involved. SAP Business Workflow is particularly suitable for situations in which work processes have to be run through repeatedly, or situations in which the business process requires the involvement of a large number of agents in a specific sequence.
Features
SAP Business Workflow provides a number of tools for defining and analyzing workflows as well as for monitoring operation.
The Workflow Builder is for displaying and making changes to workflows. You can make small extensions directly to the original workflows supplied by SAP, such as carrying out your own agent assignments or changing deadline monitoring.
There are several Workflow Wizards to support you in the definition of workflows, with which you can create specific parts of a workflow. The Workflow Wizard Explorer gives you an overview of the existing Workflow Wizards.
In order to make the functions of the R/3 Systems available to a workflow, you use business objects, which you can define and analyze in the Business Object Builder. These business objects are made available to the workflow in reusable tasks. The Business Wizard Explorer gives you an overview of all existing tasks.
You can also use SAP Business Workflow to respond to errors and exceptions in other, existing business processes. You can start a workflow when predefined events occur, for example an event can be triggered if particular errors are found during an automatic check.
Please follow the links,
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04s/helpdata/en/04/926f8546f311d189470000e829fbbd/content.htm
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_46c/helpdata/en/c5/e4a930453d11d189430000e829fbbd/content.htm
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/a1/172437130e0d09e10000009b38f839/frameset.htm
A good tutorial
http://www.thespot4sap.com/articles/Invoice_Verification_Automation_Using_SAP_Workflow.asp
http://www.sap-basis-abap.com/wf/sap-business-workflow.htm
http://www.sap-img.com/workflow/sap-workflow.htm
/people/alan.rickayzen/blog
/people/jocelyn.dart/blog/2006/06/19/why-use-abap-oo-with-workflow
a good book
http://www.sap-press.com/product.cfm?account=&product=H950
http://help.sap.com/printdocu/core/Print46c/en/data/pdf/PSWFL/PSWFL.pdf
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_47x200/helpdata/en/4a/dac507002f11d295340000e82dec10/frameset.htm
http://www.workflowing.com/id18.htm
http://www.e-workflow.org/
http://web.mit.edu/sapr3/dev/newdevstand.html
Check the following PDF
http://help.sap.com/printdocu/core/Print46c/en/data/pdf/BCBMTWFMSTART/BCBMTWFMSTART.pdf
http://help.sap.com/printdocu/core/Print46c/en/data/pdf/BCBMTWFMDEMO/BCBMTWFMDEMO.pdf
http://help.sap.com/printdocu/core/Print46c/en/data/pdf/BCBMTWFMPM/BCBMTWFMPM.pdf
http://help.sap.com/printdocu/core/Print46c/en/data/pdf/PSWFL/PSWFL.pdf
Regards,
Sai

Let's discuss my application architecture,and give me your opinions

hello
we have several internal systems that are within the same lan and want to communicate with several external systems that may be in the other buildings by using the release line.i am now considering the architecture for the project,and have got an immature blueprint,please help me to make it more perfect by give me your opinions,the scenario as:
within the lan,there are several systems that are developed by using different languages,let's suppose they are two(named internal1 and internal2),the two systems need to communicate with other two external systems(named external1 and external2) that are also developed by using different languages.all of the communications are bi-direction.there are several combinations:
1 internal1 <--> internal2
2 internal1 <--> external1 or external2
3 internal2 <--> external1 or external2
in my project,the timelimit is critical,as short as possible.
according to the mentioned requirements,i decide to develop a infomation exchanging platform by using java which sit in the MIDDLE of the internal and external systems and WITHIN the lan,act as information dispatcher or coordinator,both of the internal system and external system communicate with it only.considering the multi-language and time-critical feature,i choose the way of socket communication among the systems and design a set of xml format internal protocol.otherwise,i think the message middleware are also needed within my project as message buffer.when i deepen into the detailed designing,i get some confusions,let us discuss them as followiing:
1 if is the socket the good solution for my project?how can i assign the ports?because of the introduction of the information exchanging platform into my project,the communication combination is simplified to "internal system<-->info exchange platform" and "external system<-->info exchange platform",the crucial point for the port designing is how to assign the port in the info exchange platform,that is SERVER socket port.in my designing,i plan to assign different port for each subsystem.thus,the devleopment to the info exchange platform is simplified,that is:when the message comes,i don't need to analyse the xml message to check which system it comes from.but some people suggest me to open ONE port to all the internal systems,and ANOTHER port to all the external sysetms.i don't know which solution is better?if are there some regulations that concern about the socket port assigning?
2 if is the information exchanging platform needed?some one suggest that subsystems can communicate with each other directly,
the coordinating platform is not needed.but i think,from the EAI point of view,there should be a adapter between the internal system and external system.
3 where should i put the message queue server?and if is the mom needed?i plan to use the mq between the exchange platform and external systems ONLY,and it is also within the lan,in my designing,i config two queue for EACH external system,one for incoming message and other for outgoing message,to each queue,i assign a message listener to execute different operations on its "onMessage" method,that is:when the message come from internal system,the exchange platform send them to the exact OUTGOING queue according to the destination of the message,then the listener of the queue call the socket of the according external system and send the message to it.otherwise,when the external system need to send the message to internal system,it call the exact socket port in the exchange platform that is assigned to it as mentioned above,the platform accept the msg,and send them to the exact incoming queue,then the listener deal with the msg and send them to the internal destination.in this solution,i put the mq behind the socket,but someone give me another suggestion,that is i directly put the message queue between the exchange platform and the external systems instead of using the socket as the front-end,all of them send the message to the queue and listen the queue,but i think,in such solution,the external system must listen the queue REMOTELY,is it a good way?
also,somebody tell me that the exchange platform and remote external system can communicate each other DIRECTLY by socket,the message queue is not needed,i don't make sure if the mq is necessary in my situation?and what is the benefit and disadvantage?
as for the communication between the internal system and info exchange platform,i think the mq is NOT needed,they can communicate each other directly by socket,furthermore,in my designing,i make them connect to each other FOREVER,that is i don't close the socket after each message transferation,as mentioned above in the issue of the socket assigning,every port in the exchange platform is DEDICATED,that means the port is specific to each system,so that they don't need to create and close socket connection frequently,that will make the program more performant,but if i use one port to listen all the internal system,then the socket must be closed by the end of each transferation because of the block problem,that is just another reason why i use dedicated port connection to each of the internal system.
4 the another question is the secure issue accompanying by the socket,i think i needn't consider such problem in the internal connection,but to the connection between the platform and external system,the issue become preeminent,that is i must open the socket port in the firewall.but i think the connection between the lan and the external system use special line,not by internet,i wonder if the secure probem is critical in such situation?otherwise,i remember that some kinds of product from visibroker company can solve the firewall socket problem by using the http channel protocol,but i don't remember its name for sure,it seem like is called something gateway.who used such kind thing?and tell me how does it work?

hello
we have several internal systems that are within the same lan and want to communicate with several external systems that may be in the other buildings by using the release line.i am now considering the architecture for the project,and have got an immature blueprint,please help me to make it more perfect by give me your opinions,the scenario as:
within the lan,there are several systems that are developed by using different languages,let's suppose they are two(named internal1 and internal2),the two systems need to communicate with other two external systems(named external1 and external2) that are also developed by using different languages.all of the communications are bi-direction.there are several combinations:
1 internal1 <--> internal2
2 internal1 <--> external1 or external2
3 internal2 <--> external1 or external2
in my project,the timelimit is critical,as short as possible.
according to the mentioned requirements,i decide to develop a infomation exchanging platform by using java which sit in the MIDDLE of the internal and external systems and WITHIN the lan,act as information dispatcher or coordinator,both of the internal system and external system communicate with it only.considering the multi-language and time-critical feature,i choose the way of socket communication among the systems and design a set of xml format internal protocol.otherwise,i think the message middleware are also needed within my project as message buffer.when i deepen into the detailed designing,i get some confusions,let us discuss them as followiing:
1 if is the socket the good solution for my project?how can i assign the ports?because of the introduction of the information exchanging platform into my project,the communication combination is simplified to "internal system<-->info exchange platform" and "external system<-->info exchange platform",the crucial point for the port designing is how to assign the port in the info exchange platform,that is SERVER socket port.in my designing,i plan to assign different port for each subsystem.thus,the devleopment to the info exchange platform is simplified,that is:when the message comes,i don't need to analyse the xml message to check which system it comes from.but some people suggest me to open ONE port to all the internal systems,and ANOTHER port to all the external sysetms.i don't know which solution is better?if are there some regulations that concern about the socket port assigning?
2 if is the information exchanging platform needed?some one suggest that subsystems can communicate with each other directly,
the coordinating platform is not needed.but i think,from the EAI point of view,there should be a adapter between the internal system and external system.
3 where should i put the message queue server?and if is the mom needed?i plan to use the mq between the exchange platform and external systems ONLY,and it is also within the lan,in my designing,i config two queue for EACH external system,one for incoming message and other for outgoing message,to each queue,i assign a message listener to execute different operations on its "onMessage" method,that is:when the message come from internal system,the exchange platform send them to the exact OUTGOING queue according to the destination of the message,then the listener of the queue call the socket of the according external system and send the message to it.otherwise,when the external system need to send the message to internal system,it call the exact socket port in the exchange platform that is assigned to it as mentioned above,the platform accept the msg,and send them to the exact incoming queue,then the listener deal with the msg and send them to the internal destination.in this solution,i put the mq behind the socket,but someone give me another suggestion,that is i directly put the message queue between the exchange platform and the external systems instead of using the socket as the front-end,all of them send the message to the queue and listen the queue,but i think,in such solution,the external system must listen the queue REMOTELY,is it a good way?
also,somebody tell me that the exchange platform and remote external system can communicate each other DIRECTLY by socket,the message queue is not needed,i don't make sure if the mq is necessary in my situation?and what is the benefit and disadvantage?
as for the communication between the internal system and info exchange platform,i think the mq is NOT needed,they can communicate each other directly by socket,furthermore,in my designing,i make them connect to each other FOREVER,that is i don't close the socket after each message transferation,as mentioned above in the issue of the socket assigning,every port in the exchange platform is DEDICATED,that means the port is specific to each system,so that they don't need to create and close socket connection frequently,that will make the program more performant,but if i use one port to listen all the internal system,then the socket must be closed by the end of each transferation because of the block problem,that is just another reason why i use dedicated port connection to each of the internal system.
4 the another question is the secure issue accompanying by the socket,i think i needn't consider such problem in the internal connection,but to the connection between the platform and external system,the issue become preeminent,that is i must open the socket port in the firewall.but i think the connection between the lan and the external system use special line,not by internet,i wonder if the secure probem is critical in such situation?otherwise,i remember that some kinds of product from visibroker company can solve the firewall socket problem by using the http channel protocol,but i don't remember its name for sure,it seem like is called something gateway.who used such kind thing?and tell me how does it work?

Need opinions about using methods in-line

Hello fellow SDNers,
I have this piece of code where i use functional method as operand, string formatting options in-line et al. A friend of mine says it's not too descriptive.
cl_demo_output=>display_text( |Laufzeit: { lcl_calc_laufzeit=>main(
im_date_from = p_begda
im_date_to = p_endda )-count ALIGN = LEFT } Monat(e)| ).
Is Too-little is just too confusing?
I like in-line data declarations, functional methods because i feel they are more intuitive.
What are your ideas/opinions about it?
BR,
Suhas

Hi Suhas,
when i was starting with C-programming, i was impressed by what you could achieve with just so little of actual coding.
I thougt it was quite cool, when I managed to squeeze whole programs into just a few lines, using heavily nested ternary operators and for-loops.
Well, they did what they where meant to do, but when after a while i had to alter one only gradually, it took me some time to rethink, what i myself had created not so long ago.
Imagining how someone else would try to follow my line of thought, i came to the conclusion, that it was not so desireable, to squeeze the last bit of efficiency out of the characters that built the source-code, but that it could be far better, to enfold it, make it bigger, even less elegant, but allthemore easier to understand.
Why do i tell you this?
I seem to recognize a bit of the fascination, i felt myself, in your code sample. Letting you beeing carried away by possibility alone, does not necessarily lead to the best results on the long run.
Back to your question - i'm afraid, your friend was right.
You can do better, without loosing to much.
Truth be told, i haven't done too much in the line of string templates and nested method calls yet.
I have to admit, i'm challenged even to follow, what your sample exactly does. Nevertheless, i will dig in and discover whatever it may provide for me .
Best regards - Jörg

What are peoples opinions about streaming videos on website i.e. justintv for example. is there are hight risk fr a mac? I have just purchased my first mac and am tempted but don't want to compromise my new mac

what are peoples opinions about streaming videos on website i.e. justintv for example. is there are hight risk fr a mac? I have just purchased my first mac and am tempted but don't want to compromise my new mac

There are no known viruses for OS X. If you have to worry about a website putting some malware on your computer, then you should not visit it any longer. Find a legitimate site.

Your Opinions: Inner Classes Need static Members

Hi All,
I want to solicit opinions for a minor change to the way inner classes work. I submitted this as an RFE to Sun and they rejected it, really without giving a reason. I'd like to know your opinions. If there is strong support I will repost the RFE.
As you probably know, inner classes cannot have static members. The following generates a compiler error:import java.util.*;
public class MyClass {
   class MyInnerClass {
      // Next line causes compiler error...
      static Map m = new HashMap();
}In order to get around this you have to make the Map variable a static member of the containing class:import java.util.*;
public class MyClass {
   static Map m = new HashMap(); // so much for encapsulation...
   class MyInnerClass {
}I am suggesting that inner class be allowed to contain static members. Here's my reasoning...please comment:
There are times when members (i.e., fields and methods) rightfully belong to the class as a whole, not to any particular instance of a class. I'm sure we've all found times when it was necessary to have static members in our classes. The same issues that necessitated using static members in top-level classes make them desirable for inner classes as well.
Designing a class as an inner class is a step toward encapsulation. By forcing static members that logically belong in an inner class to be declared in the containing class is to crack the encapsulation, IMHO.
Even though a containing class has access to all of an inner class' members (including private members) and vice versa, I think the notion of inner static members still is more OO-ish.
What are your opinions? Would allowing inner classes to contain static members make Java more object oriented? I think it would.
Technically, I don't think there's any reason this cannot work since the JVM has no notion of inner classes, per se.
What do you think?

an inner class is effectively a non static instance
variable of its enclosing class. Instance member, but not a variable. it's a class, a type, not a variable.
>
I think the problem here is that making a field static
means more than just that that field and its value are
common to every instance of the class. It means that
the value is valid without an instantiation of that
class.
Since the class itself must be instantiated (it is
not static), What do you mean, excatly, by "_must_ be instantiated"? You are not ever "required" to instantiate anything unless you want to use it.
you can't have static member data inside it. I don't see how this follows from the previous part of the statement.
How would you reference the static member data of
the inner class? You would have to specify an
instance of the inner class, and since this breaks
the meaning of static, you can't have static members
in an inner class.How about outerObj.InnerClass.staticMember The syntax is well defined. The question at hand is, do we really want to allow this? The syntax to do this should only be an issue after that question has been answered in the affirmative. The people at Sun have decided not to allow it, so for now, syntax is a non-issue.
>
if you wanted a static member in an inner class you
could put it in a super class of the inner class...Or in the enclosing class, as suggested in the orginal post.

What is your opinion about IDEs?

I've heard different opinions about using IDEs like Jbuilder, Symantec VisualCafe, Microsoft J++...
Some people think that to program in java using a simple text editor is a prehistoric and a very hard way and they prefer using IDEs.
Other people think that IDEs are not good tools to program in java because they add a lot of unnecessary code and because you have more control for the code if you program all by yourself. These persons maybe think that the only utility of IDEs is their help.
I would like to know all your opinion about this.
Thanks!

Hi,
I think it depends on the context if one may use an IDE or not.
There are 3 things to be considered:
1) processor speed
2) application type
3) lazyness
ad 1:
If you want to use an IDE, you must have a powerful processor.
In fact, all major JAVA IDEs are written entirely in JAVA.
So a Pentium 3 or K7 and faster processors are advisable.
ad 2:
When you write servlets or small text based applications with only a few classes, an notepad like nedit for UNIX systems is in fact the best solution.
A huge JAVA program with many screens (SWING or AWT) for instance cannot be easily developed with a small editor. Here an IDE should be considered as a must.
(Unless you are really a hardcore Java specialist)
The same approach can be applied to bean development.
ad 3:
IDE come with many pre-constructed classes and concepts. Developing a client/server or multi-tier application can be an easy task if you spent some money on an IDE.
Other advantages of IDE are built-in tutorials and programming enhancements (when you type the name of an object the IDE shows you immediately all its methods for example). So if you are a beginner or one of those people that thinks that a programm cannot be done without development platforms like Microsoft Visual XXX, JAVA IDEs are a logical conclusion.

Opinions about this PSU

Hi everyone!
I want to know opinions about this PSU, a Topower True 320W, it cost a half than an Antec True 430, and has the same values for 3.3, 5 and 12v. Here are the details
http://www.topower.com.tw/home/atx12v_320p4.htm
For what I've seen on THG website, seems to be a good one.
Specs:
DC Output +3.3V +5V +12V -12V -5V +5VSB
Max 26A 32A 15A 1.0A 0.8A 2.5A
Peak 28A 41A 19A 1.0A 0.8A 2.5A
Combined 180W 180W 12W 4W 12.5W
300W 28W
Peak Load 420W/60secs
Efficiency 70% minimum at 115 VAC, 320W output
Note: I'll use it at 230 VAC, I don't know if this will change any values of the above.
Thanks in advance

Stilup is right. Skimping on a power supply will only bring you more headaches than it's worth. Buy a Good brand name supply 400+ watts, and you will never run into tons of problems that others have, trying to run a hi power system with a $29.95 power supply. Every time you up the cpu ,you need more power. Bigger video card? more power. Add a drive? more power. If you buy a marginal supply in the beginning, you may get it to run your system, until you add something. I have seen hundreds of posts that when they finally divuge what the specs of thier supplys, it is painfully clear what the problem is. All my systems run at least a 400+watt supply with at least 220 combined watt. The exception to this rule, is True power supplys, that supply each single rail seperately ,so the combined thing doesn't apply. BD51

Your experience about Standby Database (Logical).

Hi,
As expressed in the subject of the thread, I'd like to get some feedback about Logical Standby.
One of the databases (A) here has a setup with a Physical Standby (B). In order to lighten the workload on A, i want to "upgrade" B to a Logical Standby. The procedure is already defined, tested and functionnal. But as I never managed a Logical Standby, it would be great if you could share your experience about:
1/ A's workload: Will there be a big overhead due to log treatments (and supplemental log data)?
2/ LAS: Will it take longer to apply an archived redo log to Logical B than it takes on the Physical B?
3/ I can't set the hardware on B's host to the same level as it's on A's host.
A has (6cpu, 20GiB RAM, half for SGA)
Physical B has (2cp, 9GiB RAM, 5GiB for SGA)
Logical B will have (3cpu, 12GiB RAM, xxxGiB SGA)
The load on B will be very very less than it is on A. Knowing A perfs is O.K., will B perf on reporting be O.K.?
4/ my target for backup is now B. When the "upgrade" will be finished, would you advise to continue the backup on the Logical Standby, or to switch to a backup via (RMAN/HotBackup/...) ?
5/ Any other advice you could give :-)
Thanks,
Yoann.

Hi Yoann,
Some time ago I created a logical database for Oracle 9.2.0.4 db on RH Linux then on 9.2.0.6 ver (same OS). It was very tempting to decrease loading on primary database through using logical standby, but It was not moved to production. I stuck with some problems when transactions stopped because of some inconsistency (I used transaction consistency set to NONE because of performance) and there were a couple of them between a hundred of tables. After that I tried to create a database link upon the primary database, but it was not apt to use with the same procedures to execute.
Regarding questions:
1. I did not find the big overhead, but a lot of additional actions should be done due to maintenance tables w/o PK on LGSTBY
2. Difficult to say ...
3. I had LGSTBY half of power of primary
4. I will not you advise to backup LGSTBY because of some possible problems with transactions, maintenance etc. better to use RMAN on primary or physical standby
5. Try to test 10g logical standby (I have read that there is no need to freeze the primary database during logical standby creation)
Hope this helps,
Andrey

Router ROMMON upgrade - your opinions

Hello,
I've read in several documents that there is only a need to upgrade ROMMON if there are new features in new ROMMON versions.But, e.g. the ROMMON upgrades for the Cisco 2800 platform, the changelog for 12.4(13r)T5 says "Enhancement for device access in certain Cisco routers.",
12.4(13r)T6 says "DRAM access optimization" and 12.4(13r)T11 says "write/erase timeout increase + status read changes".
Or with the Cisco 2900 platform, the changelog for 15.0(1r)M10 says:
Saving of IOS config sometimes fails on some 2900s (Fix in ROMMON)
-    Bootflash access timing parameter change.
Compact Flash timing parameter changes (ROMMON)
-    Compact flash access timing parameter change.
I think the bug "Saving of IOS config sometimes fails" is not a small one. And I don't know what "DRAM access optimization" or "write/erase timeout increase + status read changes" exactly does.
Is it still true to upgrade ROMMON just in case there are new features which are needed. Or should the ROMMON be upgraded just as the IOS if a new version with fixes is available?
Thank you for your opinions.

Disclaimer
The    Author of this posting offers the information contained within this    posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that    there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose.   Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not   be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In    no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including,   without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
Just like with IOS upgrades, generally most would upgrade if there's a new feature or bug fix that pertains to you. When neither is true, most prefer to not upgrade; "it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Consider many software releases are for bug fixes, so although you might not have bumped into a known defect, you may. This would argue for upgrading all maintenance fixes. However, sometimes, maintenance for defects introduces other defects. This argues only do an upgrade if operationally necessary.
So, whether it's an IOS or ROMMON upgrade, it's really what you think is best.
PS:
BTW, for some platforms like the 2800, I recall an effective ROMMON update would force an immediate reload, unlike a IOS upgrade which can be loaded onto flash and the reload scheduled for later. (Suspect this is why Leo insures there's a new IOS on the 2800 before he does the ROMMON upgrade.)

Your opinions about workflow

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for