ASP.NET Web PDF Document Viewer/Editor Control Library

If the database goes offline, the data stream keeps on going and the data generated during the system failure will never be processed (Nasdaq does not shut down because your database crashed, after all!) That this data is not processed is OK, because the stock data is so time-sensitive, after a few seconds it would be overwritten by new data anyway An application that implements its own queuing mechanism, for example one that has data in a table with a PROCESSED_FLAG column As new data arrives, it is inserted with a value of PROCESSED_FLAG='N' (unprocessed) Another routine is.

ssrs code 128 barcode font, ssrs code 39, ssrs data matrix, winforms pdf 417 reader, winforms qr code reader, winforms upc-a reader, itextsharp remove text from pdf c#, pdfsharp replace text c#, winforms ean 13 reader, c# remove text from pdf,

tasked with reading the PROCESSED_FLAG='N' records, performing some small, fast transaction and updating the PROCESSED_FLAG='N' to 'Y'. If it commits but that commit is later undone (by a system failure), it is OK because the application that processes these records will just process the record again it is restartable. If you look at these application categories, you ll notice that all three of them are background, noninteractive applications. They do not interact with a human being directly. Any application that does interact with a person, that reports to the person commit complete, should use the synchronous commit. Asynchronous commits are not a tuning device for your online customer-facing applications. Asynchronous commits are applicable only to batch-oriented applications, those that are automatically restartable upon failure. Interactive applications are not restartable automatically upon failure a human being must redo the transaction. Therefore, you have another flag that tells you whether this capability can be considered do you have a batch application or an interactive one Unless it is batchoriented, synchronous commit is the way to go. So, outside of those three categories of batch applications, this new capability COMMIT WRITE NOWAIT should probably not be used. If you do use it, you need to ask yourself what would happen if your application is told commit processed, but later, the commit is undone. You need to be able to answer that question and come to the conclusion that it will be OK if that happens. If you can t answer that question, or if a committed change being lost would have serious repercussions, you should not use the asynchronous commit capability.

Caution Folding operators are very powerful and can help you avoid many explicit uses of recursion or

Since PL/SQL was first introduced in version 6 of Oracle, it has been transparently using an asynchronous commit. That approach has worked because all PL/SQL is like a batch program in a way the end user does not know the outcome of the procedure until it is completely finished. That s also why this asynchronous commit is used only in non-distributed PL/SQL blocks of code; if we involve more than one database, then there are two things two databases relying on the commit being durable. When two databases are relying on the commit being durable, we have to utilize synchronous protocols or a change might be committed in one database but not the other.

Note Of course, pipelined PL/SQL functions deviate from normal PL/SQL functions. In normal PL/SQL

loops in your code. However, they are sometimes overused in functional programming and can be hard for novice users to read and understand. Take the time to document uses of these operators, or consider using them to build simpler operators that apply a particular accumulation function.

functions, the outcome is not known until the end of the stored procedure call. Pipelined functions in general are able to return data to a client long before they complete (they return chunks of data to the client, a bit at a time). But since pipelined functions are called from SELECT statements and would not be committing anyway, they do not come into play in this discussion.

Using aggregate operators to form queries is closely related to the sequence expression notation described in 3 and is used frequently in this book For example, namesSalesOver30 defined previously can also be defined as follows: seq { for (name, age, dept) in people do if (age >= 30 && dept = "Sales") then yield name } This is simply a different notation for the same computation For very simple queries, F# sequence expressions also support an even more compact form where if/then clauses are replaced by when, the final do is dropped from the for statement, and yield is replaced by ->: seq { for (name, age, dept) in people when (age >= 30 && dept = "Sales") -> name } There is no difference between these two sequence expressions it s just a matter of syntax You can use sequence expressions in conjunction with the |> operator.