To: flatsville who wrote (3082 ) 12/29/1998 4:43:00 PM From: John Mansfield Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 9818
Re: Y2K Deniers = FUBAR (Re: Perfect example of Doombrood bullsh*t) more options Author: cory hamasaki Email: kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net Date: 1998/12/28 Forums: comp.software.year-2000 more headers author profile view thread On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 20:40:21, nada@na.da (redrum) wrote: > For once I have to agree with Don here. The big advantage that fix on > failure has is that they KNOW where the problems will be, can go right > to them, and get them fixed. Na-na, If it's so easy, just image the system to an LPAR, roll the clock forward (and yes, age some data), IPL, take the hit this weekend, and by Jan 5th, the 6th at the latest, everything would be fixed. Oops, oops, why hasn't anyone done that? Why spend millions, billions of dollars analyzing, patching, testing, when it could be done in a few days using the existing maintenance staff? Is it that those who are really working on Y2K are too stupid to see this obvious solution? Are they trying to stree-eetch out the job? Just make it fail this weekend, they'll KNOW where the problems will be, go right to them, and get them fixed. Unfortunately production systems don't work like that. Some will fail right off, -pop-, SYSUDUMP w/ 0Cx, there it is. Some will cry for help as they reject all the records, but most will *seem* to work and only after detailed analysis will they learn that records have been lost, data has been scrambled, or information has been doubly entered. It just doesn't work that easily. This thing is a mess. I'm reminded that Clifford Stole, "The Coocoo's Egg", believes that these problems can be fixed when they fail. No prob, a couple hours, a day or two and all-better. This is going to be a terrific mess, unlike anything we've seen and I've seen some IT disasters. cory hamasaki 369 Days, 8,858 Hours.