Spelling suggestions: "subject:"event notification"" "subject:"avent notification""
1 |
A Runtime Software Visualization EnvironmentKurtz, Benjamin L 15 July 2002 (has links)
"As software systems become more complex, so does the task of understanding them. To modify even a simple component of a complex system, at least a rudimentary understanding of the structure and behavior of the whole system is necessary. Although currently available development tools can provide a static representation of a complex system, these utilities are severely limited and prohibitively expensive. As a result, most programmers working on large software systems today resort to classic debuggers and time-consuming plain-text searches through hundreds or thousands of source files. This proposal describes a software development environment that uses static representations of hierarchically structured source code side by side with dynamic visualizations of software systems as they run. This environment provides an intuitive, visual means of easily comprehending complex systems, and has been provided as an open-source development tool for both professionals and students of software engineering."
|
2 |
AN ENERGY EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR EVENT NOTIFICATION AND DATA AGGREGATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKSCHUGH, SHRUTI 31 March 2004 (has links)
No description available.
|
3 |
Scalability of push and pull based event notification : A comparison between webhooks and polling / Skalbarhet hos push- och pullbaserad eventnotifikation : En jämförelse mellan webhooks och pollingDunér, Daniel, Nilsson, Marcus January 2020 (has links)
Today’s web applications make extensive use of APIs between server and client, or server to server in order to provide new information in the form of events. The question was whether the different methods of procuring events are different in how they scale. This study aims to compare performance between webhooks and polling, the two most commonly used pull and push based methods for event notification when scaling up traffic. The purpose is to create a basis for developers when choosing the method for event notification. The comparison has been developed through measurements of typical indicators of good performance for web applications: CPU usage, memory usage and response time. The tests gave indications that webhooks perform better in most circumstances, but further testing is needed in a more well-defined environment to draw a confident conclusion. / Dagens webbapplikationer använder sig i stor utsträckning av API:er mellan server och klient, eller server till server för att inhämta ny information i form av events (händelser). Frågan är om de olika metoder som finns för att inhämta events skalar olika bra. Förevarande studie ämnar att jämföra prestanda mellan ”webhooks” och ”polling”, de två mest använda pull- och pushbaserade metoderna för eventnotifikation vid uppskalning av trafik. Syftet är att skapa ett underlag för utvecklare vid valet av metod för eventnotifikation. Jämförelsen har tagits fram genom mätningar av typiska indikatorer för god prestanda hos en webbapplikation: CPU-användning, minnesanvändning och svarstid. Testerna gav indikationer om att webhooks är bättre men det krävs vidare testning i en mer väldefinierad miljö för att dra en säkrare slutsats.
|
4 |
Symbiotic Audio Communication on Interactive TransportOlaleye, Olufunke I. 01 May 2007 (has links)
No description available.
|
Page generated in 0.1135 seconds