Autoscaling, (also written as auto scaling, auto-scaling, or known as automatic scaling), is a method used in cloud computing that dynamically adjusts the amount of computational resources in a server farm - typically measured by the number of active servers - automatically based on the load on the farm. For example, the number of servers running behind a web application may be increased or decreased automatically based on the number of active users on the site. Since such metrics may change dramatically throughout the course of the day, and servers are a limited resource that cost money to run even while idle, there is often an incentive to run "just enough" servers to support the current load while still being able to support sudden and large spikes in activity. Autoscaling is helpful for such needs, as it can reduce the number of active servers when activity is low, and launch new servers when activity is high. Autoscaling is closely related to, and builds upon, the idea of load balancing. == Advantages == Autoscaling offers the following advantages: For companies running their own web server infrastructure, autoscaling typically means allowing some servers to go to sleep during times of low load, saving on electricity costs (as well as water costs if water is being used to cool the machines). For companies using infrastructure hosted in the cloud, autoscaling can mean lower bills, because most cloud providers charge based on total usage rather than maximum capacity. Even for companies that cannot reduce the total compute capacity they run or pay for at any given time, autoscaling can help by allowing the company to run less time-sensitive workloads on machines that get freed up by autoscaling during times of low traffic. Autoscaling solutions, such as the one offered by Amazon Web Services, can also take care of replacing unhealthy instances and therefore protecting somewhat against hardware, network, and application failures. Autoscaling can offer greater uptime and more availability in cases where production workloads are variable and unpredictable. Autoscaling differs from having a fixed daily, weekly, or yearly cycle of server use in that it is responsive to actual usage patterns, and thus reduces the potential downside of having too few or too many servers for the traffic load. For instance, if traffic is usually lower at midnight, then a static scaling solution might schedule some servers to sleep at night, but this might result in downtime on a night where people happen to use the Internet more (for instance, due to a viral news event). Autoscaling, on the other hand, can handle unexpected traffic spikes better. == Terminology == In the list below, we use the terminology used by Amazon Web Services (AWS). However, alternative names are noted and terminology that is specific to the names of Amazon services is not used for the names. == Practice == === Amazon Web Services (AWS) === Amazon Web Services launched the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) service in August 2006, that allowed developers to programmatically create and terminate instances (machines). At the time of initial launch, AWS did not offer autoscaling, but the ability to programmatically create and terminate instances gave developers the flexibility to write their own code for autoscaling. Third-party autoscaling software for AWS began appearing around April 2008. These included tools by Scalr and RightScale. RightScale was used by Animoto, which was able to handle Facebook traffic by adopting autoscaling. On May 18, 2009, Amazon launched its own autoscaling feature along with Elastic Load Balancing, as part of Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud. Autoscaling is now an integral component of Amazon's EC2 offering. Autoscaling on Amazon Web Services is done through a web browser or the command line tool. In May 2016 Autoscaling was also offered in AWS ECS Service. On-demand video provider Netflix documented their use of autoscaling with Amazon Web Services to meet their highly variable consumer needs. They found that aggressive scaling up and delayed and cautious scaling down served their goals of uptime and responsiveness best. In an article for TechCrunch, Zev Laderman, the co-founder and CEO of Newvem, a service that helps optimize AWS cloud infrastructure, recommended that startups use autoscaling in order to keep their Amazon Web Services costs low. Various best practice guides for AWS use suggest using its autoscaling feature even in cases where the load is not variable. That is because autoscaling offers two other advantages: automatic replacement of any instances that become unhealthy for any reason (such as hardware failure, network failure, or application error), and automatic replacement of spot instances that get interrupted for price or capacity reasons, making it more feasible to use spot instances for production purposes. Netflix's internal best practices require every instance to be in an autoscaling group, and its conformity monkey terminates any instance not in an autoscaling group in order to enforce this best practice. === Microsoft's Windows Azure === On June 27, 2013, Microsoft announced that it was adding autoscaling support to its Windows Azure cloud computing platform. Documentation for the feature is available on the Microsoft Developer Network. === Oracle Cloud === Oracle Cloud Platform allows server instances to automatically scale a cluster in or out by defining an auto-scaling rule. These rules are based on CPU and/or memory utilization and determine when to add or remove nodes. === Google Cloud Platform === On November 17, 2014, the Google Compute Engine announced a public beta of its autoscaling feature for use in Google Cloud Platform applications. As of March 2015, the autoscaling tool is still in Beta. === Facebook === In a blog post in August 2014, a Facebook engineer disclosed that the company had started using autoscaling to bring down its energy costs. The blog post reported a 27% decline in energy use for low traffic hours (around midnight) and a 10-15% decline in energy use over the typical 24-hour cycle. === Kubernetes Horizontal Pod Autoscaler === Kubernetes Horizontal Pod Autoscaler automatically scales the number of pods in a replication controller, deployment or replicaset based on observed CPU utilization (or, with beta support, on some other, application-provided metrics) == Alternative autoscaling decision approaches == Autoscaling by default uses reactive decision approach for dealing with traffic scaling: scaling only happens in response to real-time changes in metrics. In some cases, particularly when the changes occur very quickly, this reactive approach to scaling is insufficient. Two other kinds of autoscaling decision approaches are described below. === Scheduled autoscaling approach === This is an approach to autoscaling where changes are made to the minimum size, maximum size, or desired capacity of the autoscaling group at specific times of day. Scheduled scaling is useful, for instance, if there is a known traffic load increase or decrease at specific times of the day, but the change is too sudden for reactive approach based autoscaling to respond fast enough. AWS autoscaling groups support scheduled scaling. === Predictive autoscaling === This approach to autoscaling uses predictive analytics. The idea is to combine recent usage trends with historical usage data as well as other kinds of data to predict usage in the future, and autoscale based on these predictions. For parts of their infrastructure and specific workloads, Netflix found that Scryer, their predictive analytics engine, gave better results than Amazon's reactive autoscaling approach. In particular, it was better for: Identifying huge spikes in demand in the near future and getting capacity ready a little in advance Dealing with large-scale outages, such as failure of entire availability zones and regions Dealing with variable traffic patterns, providing more flexibility on the rate of scaling out or in based on the typical level and rate of change in demand at various times of day On November 20, 2018, AWS announced that predictive scaling would be available as part of its autoscaling offering.
SQLBuddy
SQL Buddy is an open-source web-based application primarily coded in PHP, that allows users to control both MySQL and SQLite database through a web browser. The project was well regarded for its easy installation process and the friendly user interface it offered. The application was further praised for its cross-platform compatibility, meaning users could manage their databases on various operating systems, including Linux, Windows, and macOS. The development of SQL Buddy has stopped, with version 1.3.3 being the final release on January 18, 2011. No further releases are expected.
Rapid application development
Rapid application development (RAD), also called rapid application building (RAB), is both a general term for adaptive software development approaches, and the name for James Martin's method of rapid development. In general, RAD approaches to software development put less emphasis on planning and more emphasis on an adaptive process. Prototypes are often used in addition to or sometimes even instead of design specifications. RAD is especially well suited for (although not limited to) developing software that is driven by user interface requirements. Graphical user interface builders are often called rapid application development tools. Other approaches to rapid development include the adaptive, agile, spiral, and unified models. == History == Rapid application development was a response to plan-driven waterfall processes, developed in the 1970s and 1980s, such as the Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method (SSADM). One of the problems with these methods is that they were based on a traditional engineering model used to design and build things like bridges and buildings. Software is an inherently different kind of artifact. Software can change the process used to solve a problem. As a result, knowledge gained from the development process itself can feed back to the requirements and design of the solution. Plan-driven approaches attempt to define requirements, the solution, and the implementation plan, and have a process that discourages changes. RAD approaches, on the other hand, recognize that software development is a knowledge intensive process and provide flexible processes that help take advantage of knowledge gained during the project to improve or adapt the solution. The first such RAD alternative was developed by Barry Boehm and was known as the spiral model. Boehm and other subsequent RAD approaches emphasized developing prototypes as well as or instead of rigorous design specifications. Prototypes had several advantages over traditional specifications: Risk reduction. A prototype could test some of the most difficult potential parts of the system early on in the life-cycle. This can provide valuable information as to the feasibility of a design and can prevent the team from pursuing solutions that turn out to be too complex or time-consuming to implement. This benefit of finding problems earlier in the life-cycle rather than later was a key benefit of the RAD approach. The earlier a problem can be found the cheaper it is to address. Users are better at using and reacting than at creating specifications. In the waterfall model it was common for a user to sign off on a set of requirements but then when presented with an implemented system to suddenly realize that a given design lacked some critical features or was too complex. In general most users give much more useful feedback when they can experience a prototype of the running system rather than abstractly define what that system should be. Prototypes can be usable and can evolve into the completed product. One approach used in some RAD methods was to build the system as a series of prototypes that evolve from minimal functionality to moderately useful to the final completed system. The advantage of this besides the two advantages above was that the users could get useful business functionality much earlier in the process. Starting with the ideas of Barry Boehm and others, James Martin developed the rapid application development approach during the 1980s at IBM and finally formalized it by publishing a book in 1991, Rapid Application Development. This has resulted in some confusion over the term RAD even among IT professionals. It is important to distinguish between RAD as a general alternative to the waterfall model and RAD as the specific method created by Martin. The Martin method was tailored toward knowledge intensive and UI intensive business systems. These ideas were further developed and improved upon by RAD pioneers like James Kerr and Richard Hunter, who together wrote the seminal book on the subject, Inside RAD, which followed the journey of a RAD project manager as he drove and refined the RAD Methodology in real-time on an actual RAD project. These practitioners, and those like them, helped RAD gain popularity as an alternative to traditional systems project life cycle approaches. The RAD approach also matured during the period of peak interest in business re-engineering. The idea of business process re-engineering was to radically rethink core business processes such as sales and customer support with the new capabilities of Information Technology in mind. RAD was often an essential part of larger business re engineering programs. The rapid prototyping approach of RAD was a key tool to help users and analysts "think out of the box" about innovative ways that technology might radically reinvent a core business process. Much of James Martin's comfort with RAD stemmed from Dupont's Information Engineering division and its leader Scott Schultz and their respective relationships with John Underwood who headed up a bespoke RAD development company that pioneered many successful RAD projects in Australia and Hong Kong. Successful projects that included ANZ Bank, Lendlease, BHP, Coca-Cola Amatil, Alcan, Hong Kong Jockey Club and numerous others. Success that led to both Scott Shultz and James Martin both spending time in Australia with John Underwood to understand the methods and details of why Australia was disproportionately successful in implementing significant mission critical RAD projects. == James Martin approach == The James Martin approach to RAD divides the process into four distinct phases: Requirements planning phase – combines elements of the system planning and systems analysis phases of the systems development life cycle (SDLC). Users, managers, and IT staff members discuss and agree on business needs, project scope, constraints, and system requirements. It ends when the team agrees on the key issues and obtains management authorization to continue. User design phase – during this phase, users interact with systems analysts and develop models and prototypes that represent all system processes, inputs, and outputs. The RAD groups or subgroups typically use a combination of joint application design (JAD) techniques and CASE tools to translate user needs into working models. User design is a continuous interactive process that allows users to understand, modify, and eventually approve a working model of the system that meets their needs. Construction phase – focuses on program and application development task similar to the SDLC. In RAD, however, users continue to participate and can still suggest changes or improvements as actual screens or reports are developed. Its tasks are programming and application development, coding, unit-integration and system testing. Cutover phase – resembles the final tasks in the SDLC implementation phase, including data conversion, testing, changeover to the new system, and user training. Compared with traditional methods, the entire process is compressed. As a result, the new system is built, delivered, and placed in operation much sooner. == Advantages == In modern Information Technology environments, many systems are now built using some degree of Rapid Application Development (not necessarily the James Martin approach). In addition to Martin's method, agile methods and the Rational Unified Process are often used for RAD development. The purported advantages of RAD include: Better quality. By having users interact with evolving prototypes the business functionality from a RAD project can often be much higher than that achieved via a waterfall model. The software can be more usable and has a better chance to focus on business problems that are critical to end users rather than technical problems of interest to developers. However, this excludes other categories of what are usually known as Non-functional requirements (AKA constraints or quality attributes) including security and portability. Risk control. Although much of the literature on RAD focuses on speed and user involvement a critical feature of RAD done correctly is risk mitigation. It's worth remembering that Boehm initially characterized the spiral model as a risk based approach. A RAD approach can focus in early on the key risk factors and adjust to them based on empirical evidence collected in the early part of the process. E.g., the complexity of prototyping some of the most complex parts of the system. More projects completed on time and within budget. By focusing on the development of incremental units the chances for catastrophic failures that have dogged large waterfall projects is reduced. In the Waterfall model it was common to come to a realization after six months or more of analysis and development that required a radical rethinking of the entire system. With RAD this kind of information can be discovered and acted upon earlier in the proces
NCAA transfer portal
The NCAA transfer portal is a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) application, database, and compliance tool that facilitates student athletes' transfers between member institutions. It is intended to bring greater transparency to the transfer process and to enable student athletes to publicize their desire to transfer. The transfer portal is an NCAA-wide database covering all three NCAA divisions, although most media coverage of the transfer portal involves its use in the top-level Division I (D-I). The portal launched on October 15, 2018. Regulations adopted in 2021 allowed student-athletes in D-I football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey, and baseball to transfer schools using the portal once without sitting out a year. In 2024, the NCAA authorized athletes unlimited transfers. == Process == For Divisions I and II, once an athlete desiring to transfer informs their school; the school must enter the athlete's name in the database within two business days. Then coaches and staff from other universities may contact the athlete about potentially transferring. Before the January 2026 NCAA convention, Division III schools were allowed, but not required, to enter such a student into the portal. A proposal to require use of the portal in that division was approved at the convention. The timeline for D-III members to enter athletes into the portal differs from that of the other divisions. Athletes wishing to enter the portal must first complete an educational module. Once completed, the school has seven calendar days to enter the athlete's transfer request into the portal. == Transfer windows == On August 31, 2022, the D-I board adopted a series of changes to transfer rules, introducing the concept of transfer windows, similar to those used in professional soccer worldwide. Student-athletes who wish to take advantage of the one-time transfer rule must, under normal circumstances, enter the portal within a designated window for their sport. These windows are slightly different for each NCAA sport, but are broadly grouped by the NCAA's three athletic "seasons". At that time, the windows were as follows: Fall sports – A 45-day winter window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport, and a spring window from May 1–15. According to the NCAA, "reasonable accommodations" would be made for participants in football's FBS and FCS championship games (respectively the College Football Playoff National Championship and Division I Football Championship Game), both of which take place in early January. Participants in those games had a 14-day window opening on the day after the championship game, as well as the spring window. Winter sports – A 60-day window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. Spring sports – A winter window from December 1–15, and a 45-day spring window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. For sports included in the NCAA Emerging Sports for Women program, transfer windows are the same as those for fully recognized NCAA sports. As with fully recognized NCAA sports, transfer windows linked to championship events open on the day after selections are made for the generally recognized championship events in emerging sports. Student-athletes whose athletic aid is reduced, canceled, or not renewed by their school, as well as those affected by a university's elimination of a sports team, may enter the transfer portal at any time without penalty. A slightly different exception applies to those undergoing a head coaching change; student-athletes so affected in sports other than Division I football can enter the portal within 30 days of the change, starting on the day after the coach's departure is announced. The coaching change window also applied to Division I football before October 2025. Less than a month after transfer windows were adopted, the Division I Council adopted a change that affected only graduate transfers. Student-athletes who are set to graduate with remaining athletic eligibility, and plan to continue competition as postgraduate students, were exempt from transfer windows. They could enter the portal at any time during the academic year, and were not subject to the standard deadlines of May 1 for fall and winter sports and July 1 for spring sports. In April 2024, graduate transfers became subject to the same deadlines as all other transfer students. This change did not affect windows for student-athletes affected by a head coaching change, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team. Because the Ivy League allows neither redshirting nor athletic participation by graduate students, athletes at its member schools who are set to complete four years of attendance but still have remaining athletic eligibility may enter the portal at any time during their fourth academic year of attendance. In October 2024, the Division I Council reduced transfer windows in football and basketball to a total of 30 days. For FBS and FCS football, the fall window opened for 20 days, starting on the Monday after FBS conference championship games. Participants in postseason play had a 5-day window that opened on the day after each team's final game. A 10-day spring window opened in mid-April. In men's and women's basketball, a single 30-day window opens on the day after the second round of each Division I tournament concludes. The existing exceptions regarding head coaching changes, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team remained in place. Almost exactly a year later, Division I adopted more significant changes to the football transfer portal for both FBS and FCS. The previous two windows were abolished and replaced by a single window that opens from January 2–16. Participants in the College Football Playoff National Championship—the only game in FBS or FCS played after the closure of the new window—receive a 5-day window that opens on the day after that game. The window for players undergoing a head coaching change was also reduced. A new window of 15 days opens five calendar days after the hiring or public announcement of a new head coach. Should a school fail to hire or publicly announce a new head coach within 30 days after the previous coach's departure, the window will open on the 31st day after departure, provided that the 31st day is no earlier than January 3. This particular window, also open for 15 days, may open at any time before June 30. No change was announced to the exceptions for those affected by a loss of athletic aid or the discontinuation of a team. == Impact on high school recruiting == Effective July 1, 2025, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors implemented new DI roster limits following the court-approved House settlement. Additionally, according to the NCAA, "NCAA rules for Division I programs will no longer include sport-specific scholarship limits." As a result, many top Division I programs, especially those in power conferences, are relying heavily on the transfer portal to bring in conference- and national-level student-athletes. This shift in recruiting focus has already been exemplified across Division I men's and women's track and field especially, beginning in the recruitment cycle for 2025 college entries. Track and field coaches formerly managing rosters of 120-plus (60-plus men and 60-plus women) are now limited to 45 per side for a total of 90 roster spots across men's and women's track and field, meaning they are recruiting fewer student-athletes out of high school and more immediately impactful scholarship-worthy student-athletes via the transfer portal. Roster limits for track and field teams are even more stringent in the Southeastern Conference (SEC): 35 men and 35 women. For high school track and field athletes seeking opportunities with top DI programs, they no longer need to display potential to be point-scorers, but demonstrate the ability to contribute immediately, often by competing at a level aligned with conference scoring standards.
Camera interface
The Camera Interface block or CAMIF is the hardware block that interfaces with different image sensor interfaces and provides a standard output that can be used for subsequent image processing. A typical Camera Interface would support at least a parallel interface although these days many camera interfaces are beginning to support the Mobile Industry Processor Interface (MIPI) Camera Serial Interface (CSI) interface. == Electrical connections == The camera interface's parallel interface consists of the following lines: 8 to 12 bits parallel data line These are parallel data lines that carry pixel data. The data transmitted on these lines change with every Pixel Clock (PCLK). Horizontal Sync (HSYNC) This is a special signal that goes from the camera sensor or ISP to the camera interface. An HSYNC indicates that one line of the frame is transmitted. Vertical Sync (VSYNC) This signal is transmitted after the entire frame is transferred. This signal is often a way to indicate that one entire frame is transmitted. Pixel Clock (PCLK) This is the pixel clock and it would change on every pixel. NOTE: The above lines are all treated as input lines to the Camera Interface hardware.
Plug computer
A plug computer is a small-form-factor computer whose chassis contains the AC power plug, and thus plugs directly into the wall. Alternatively, the computer may resemble an AC adapter or a similarly small device. Plug computers are often configured for use in the home or office as compact computer. == Description == Plug computers consist of a high-performance, low-power system-on-a-chip processor, with several I/O hardware ports (USB ports, Ethernet connectors, etc.). Most versions do not have provisions for connecting a display and are best suited to running media servers, back-up services, or file sharing and remote access functions; thus acting as a bridge between in-home protocols (such as Digital Living Network Alliance (DLNA) and Server Message Block (SMB)) and cloud-based services. There are, however, plug computer offerings that have analog VGA monitor and/or HDMI connectors, which, along with multiple USB ports, permit the use of a display, keyboard, and mouse, thus making them full-fledged, low-power alternatives to desktop and laptop computers. They typically run any of a number of Linux distributions. Plug computers typically consume little power and are inexpensive. == History == A number of other devices of this type began to appear at the 2009 Consumer Electronics Show. On January 6, 2009 CTERA Networks launched a device called CloudPlug that provides online backup at local disk speeds and overlays a file sharing service. The device also transforms any external USB hard drive into a network-attached storage device. On January 7, 2009, Cloud Engines unveiled the Pogoplug network access server. On January 8, 2009, Axentra announced availability of their HipServ platform. On February 23, 2009, Marvell Technology Group announced its plans to build a mini-industry around plug computers. On August 19, 2009, CodeLathe announced availability of their TonidoPlug network access server. On November 13, 2009 QuadAxis launched its plug computing device product line and development platform, featuring the QuadPlug and QuadPC and running QuadMix, a modified Linux. On January 5, 2010, Iomega announced their iConnect network access server. On January 7, 2010 Pbxnsip launched its plug computing device the sipJack running pbxnsip: an IP Communications platform.
Zoho Office Suite
Zoho Office Suite is an online office suite developed by Zoho Corporation. == History == Zoho Office Suite was launched in 2005 with a web-based word processor. Additional products, such as those for spreadsheets and presentations, were incorporated later into the suite. The applications are distributed as software as a service (SaaS). == Products == Zoho uses an open API for its Writer, Sheet, Show, Creator, Meeting, and Planner products. It also has plugins into Microsoft Word and Excel, an OpenOffice.org plugin, and a plugin for Firefox. Zoho Office Suite is free for individuals but offers a plan for teams, which includes Zoho WorkDrive, Zoho Workplace and other Zoho apps. In October 2009, Zoho integrated some of their applications with the Google Apps online suite.