ORACLE RAC CRASHES ORBITZ
Obnoxious the troll
http://www.computerworld.com/databasetopics/data/software/story/0,10801,83186,00.html
Larry use to say about DB2 architecture: shared nothing, runs nothing.
What about Oracle's RAC architecture: shared everything, crashes everything.
I blame Mary
Could have been worse.
http://theregister.co.uk/content/archive/30095.html
IBM's DB2 blamed for Danish banking crisis
By Ashlee Vance in San Francisco
Posted: 03/04/2003 at 20:38 GMT
Danske Bank is pointing fingers at IBM's DB2 database as the culprit
for a massive outage that caused the Danish bank's trading desks,
currency exchange and communications with other banks to shut down.
The problems first started on March 10 when IBM's technical division
staff came in to replace a defective power unit in an IBM Ramac
Virtual Array (RVA) storage system. An electrical outage occurred
during the repairs, which caused operations at one of the bank's two
operating centers to come to a halt.
After much work, the system was ready to be restarted and all the
engineers nearby held their breath.
The batch runs began, and tears started to shed. They were not
running correctly.
"Even though the re-start of DB2 database software went normally,
a combination of circumstances was creating inconsistencies in
the data," Danske Bank wrote in its report (pdf) on the debacle.
This first software error in DB2 database software had existed in
all similar installations since 1997, without IBM's knowledge."
Danske Bank worked for three days trying to recover the data with
more and more DB2 failures occurring and slowing the process down.
The database disasters punished the bank for a week and had some
effects on the Danish economy.
One reader said the Nationalbanken was forced to inject 5 billion
kroners into the banking sector to help push transactions through.
Danske Bank has retaliated with its damning take on the affairs but
is not stopping there. The reader says that Danske Bank wants IBM to
pay for direct and indirect damages caused by the crash, which could
amount to 50 million kroners ($7.2 mill USD), according to Danish TV
reports.
Ari Fishkind, a program manager at IBM, declined to comment on such
rumors.
He did, however, say that IBM had worked to solve the problem and
issue fixes for other customers.
"The circumstances that led to this situation were highly unusual and
no other customers have reported a similar DB2 issue," he said.
The bank is pledging to improve its IT systems at a cost of 100
million kroners. It has canned an ad-campaign that stated, "Do what
you do best. That's what we do!"
IBM might also consider pulling a case study in which the company
"Delivers Solid Returns for Danske Bank."
Solid returns indeed. ®
Daniel Morgan
Does every crash of an Informix application become a cause celebre' for Oracle,
Microsoft, and Sybase to trash Informix?
Your posting, and other like it, remind me of the following:
----------------------------------------------------------
"... That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more: it is a
tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."
----------------------------------------------------------
There are more than a few thousand possible causes of what happed. And many companies
with far larger sites than Orbitz have had no problems. So you might not be so fast to
criticize when you know nothing of what actually happened, or why. There are a lot of
layers at Orbitz between the customer and the silicon: Oracle was but one. And there were
a lot of Orbitz employees that had their fingers and thumbs in the soup.
This is not a time for glee. The next well-publicized disaster may well with DB2 or
Informix and you may find yourself looking into the mirror.
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/extinfo/certprog/oad/oad_crs.asp
damo...@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
Daniel Morgan
> Could have been worse.
>
> http://theregister.co.uk/content/archive/30095.html
>
> IBM's DB2 blamed for Danish banking crisis
> By Ashlee Vance in San Francisco
> Posted: 03/04/2003 at 20:38 GMT
>
> Danske Bank is pointing fingers at IBM's DB2 database as the culprit
> for a massive outage that caused the Danish bank's trading desks,
> currency exchange and communications with other banks to shut down.
>
> <snipped>
So lets all agree that there is no RDBMS, heck there is no software
product period, that doesn't have errors in its code.
And lets also agree that marketing departments are staffed by weasels
(ask Scott Adams if you don't believe me).
And get back to banging code and solving business problems. This is all
just so much meaningless fluff. Everybody gets their moment in the shade.
And Orbitz's problems may just as well be poorly trained staff as
anything else.
Daniel Morgan
> Could have been worse.
>
> http://theregister.co.uk/content/archive/30095.html
>
> IBM's DB2 blamed for Danish banking crisis
> By Ashlee Vance in San Francisco
> Posted: 03/04/2003 at 20:38 GMT
>
> Danske Bank is pointing fingers at IBM's DB2 database as the culprit
> for a massive outage that caused the Danish bank's trading desks,
> currency exchange and communications with other banks to shut down.
>
Noons
news:3F1829F0...@exxesolutions.com...
>
> So lets all agree that there is no RDBMS, heck there is no software
> product period, that doesn't have errors in its code.
>
> And lets also agree that marketing departments are staffed by weasels
> (ask Scott Adams if you don't believe me).
Amen.
> And get back to banging code and solving business problems. This is all
> just so much meaningless fluff. Everybody gets their moment in the shade.
> And Orbitz's problems may just as well be poorly trained staff as
> anything else.
Bingo.
--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam
Tom Longfellow
> http://www.computerworld.com/databasetopics/data/software/story/0,10801
> ,83186,00.html
>
Someone at Oracle needs to run to the marketing department and have them
pull all of their 'Unbreakable' advertising. Pride goeth before a fall.
That much arrogance deserves a little humbling. It was only a matter of
time. What humans can build, humans can break.
The only thing less intelligent than that marketing campaign is the person
who falls for it.
How many of us have been in meetings called by management at the
instigation of an sales rep who then goes on and on about how ALL of your
problems will go away if you buy their product? Most of the time, they do
not even know the business of the company.
Daniel Morgan
> > http://www.computerworld.com/databasetopics/data/software/story/0,10801
> > ,83186,00.html
> >
> Someone at Oracle needs to run to the marketing department and have them
> pull all of their 'Unbreakable' advertising.<snipped>
And next, of course, you will have them run to the marketing department at P&G
and have them pull the advertising about Whiter Whites and Brighter Brights.
And those Crest advertisements about their toothpaste ... positively
disgusting. Why my teeth are yellow and I've been brushing with their product
for years.
Which part of "marketing" don't you get.
Nothing is unbreakable. One moron can break anything.
"Unbreakable" is marketing talk for "really really robust." Anyone with only
enough mental horsepower to believe what comes out of marketing departments
doesn't have the mental capacity needed to install the product.
Tom Longfellow
misinterpreted. My suggestions were tongue in cheek. I TOTALLY get
marketing. I was just commenting on how marketing departments can
embarrass their companies.
I get the marketing. Read my entire post
>
> And next, of course, you will have them run to the marketing
> department at P&G and have them pull the advertising about Whiter
> Whites and Brighter Brights. And those Crest advertisements about
> their toothpaste ... positively disgusting. Why my teeth are yellow
> and I've been brushing with their product for years.
and when Crest starts making claims that you will have 'unbreakable' teeth,
they will have crossed the same over-hype barrier that Oracle did.
Unbreakable is, in my opinion, Unbelievable and not even within the realms
of possibility
> Which part of "marketing" don't you get.
>
> Nothing is unbreakable. One moron can break anything.
MY POINT EXACTLY - read the post - "What humans can build, humans can
break."
>
> "Unbreakable" is marketing talk for "really really robust." Anyone
> with only enough mental horsepower to believe what comes out of
> marketing departments doesn't have the mental capacity needed to
> install the product.
AGAIN, MY POINT EXACTLY: "The only thing less intelligent than that
marketing campaign is the person who falls for it. "
------
And speaking of intelligence, continuing this discussion is a waste of time
for both of us. I should not even have replied to this one, but I was
replying before I remembered that internet newsgroups are terrible places
for differences of opinion. That misinterpretation thing again.
Daniel Morgan
> GOD!! sometimes I just HATE the internet. It is too easy to be
> misinterpreted. My suggestions were tongue in cheek. I TOTALLY get
> marketing. I was just commenting on how marketing departments can
> embarrass their companies.
>
> <snipped>
This is why emoticons were invented. ;-)
Sorry if I didn't see your tongue planted firmly in your cheek.
Unfortunately PT Barnum was correct. And we will be dealing with the effluent
of marketing departments right up until customers use their own brains and stop
buying the drivel they produce. And that will not be in our lifetimes.
Mike Ault
> Tom Longfellow wrote:
>
> > GOD!! sometimes I just HATE the internet. It is too easy to be
> > misinterpreted. My suggestions were tongue in cheek. I TOTALLY get
> > marketing. I was just commenting on how marketing departments can
> > embarrass their companies.
> >
> > <snipped>
>
> This is why emoticons were invented. ;-)
>
> Sorry if I didn't see your tongue planted firmly in your cheek.
>
> Unfortunately PT Barnum was correct. And we will be dealing with the effluent
> of marketing departments right up until customers use their own brains and stop
> buying the drivel they produce. And that will not be in our lifetimes.
Just a rumor mind you, but the Orbitz glitch has been traced to some
hardware issues...will post more if I hear more.
Mike
Mark A
> >
> > > GOD!! sometimes I just HATE the internet. It is too easy to be
> > > misinterpreted. My suggestions were tongue in cheek. I TOTALLY get
> > > marketing. I was just commenting on how marketing departments can
> > > embarrass their companies.
> > >
> > > <snipped>
> >
> > This is why emoticons were invented. ;-)
> >
> > Sorry if I didn't see your tongue planted firmly in your cheek.
> >
> > Unfortunately PT Barnum was correct. And we will be dealing with the
effluent
> > of marketing departments right up until customers use their own brains
and stop
> > buying the drivel they produce. And that will not be in our lifetimes.
>
> Just a rumor mind you, but the Orbitz glitch has been traced to some
> hardware issues...will post more if I hear more.
>
> Mike
Yes, it will turn out to be a hardware problem even if Larry Ellison has to
buy the hardware company and then have the hardware company accept the
blame.
Blair Adamache
vulnerable RAC is to "hardware issues" - relational databases and
operating systems have to deal with bad disks and failing processors all
the time. But, a highly available software solution should not have
single points of failure.
Daniel Morgan
What a blivet.
In an environment as complex as Orbitz's a crash could be caused by many things.
Hardware, operating systems, networks, routers, hubs, databases, tools, etc.
etc. etc. right down to a poorly run code review on some internally generated
program or a DBA or SysAdmin that made an innocent mistake.
But you are so knee-jerk negative toward Larry, who I doubt has ever taken a
single dollar from your pocket, you jump to a conclusion the size of Mt.
Everest. Give it a break.
As Freud once said ... "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
Do the universe a favor. Wait for the facts to come out: They will. Then comment
on the facts. If they demonstrate Oracle was responsible so what. Has DB2 never
been responsible for a crash? Informix? Sybase? A 'C' compiler?
Blair Adamache
caused crashes. Never heard of a C compiler crash that interrupted
production and got the same level of coverage as Orbitz did in eWeek and
Computerworld. I guess when you buy the back page of the Economist and
Businessweek and use the word "Unbreakable", you attract a little more
attention - the same way a blivet attracts flies.
Mark A
>
> What a blivet.
>
> In an environment as complex as Orbitz's a crash could be caused by many
things.
> Hardware, operating systems, networks, routers, hubs, databases, tools,
etc.
> etc. etc. right down to a poorly run code review on some internally
generated
> program or a DBA or SysAdmin that made an innocent mistake.
>
> But you are so knee-jerk negative toward Larry, who I doubt has ever taken
a
> single dollar from your pocket, you jump to a conclusion the size of Mt.
> Everest. Give it a break.
>
> As Freud once said ... "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
>
> Do the universe a favor. Wait for the facts to come out: They will. Then
comment
> on the facts. If they demonstrate Oracle was responsible so what. Has DB2
never
> been responsible for a crash? Informix? Sybase? A 'C' compiler?
> --
> Daniel Morgan
You call him Larry? I guess you and "Larry" are buds?
Neil Truby
> Do the universe a favor. Wait for the facts to come out: They will. Then
comment
> on the facts. If they demonstrate Oracle was responsible so what. Has DB2
never
> been responsible for a crash? Informix? Sybase? A 'C' compiler?
IBM has a cunning strategy to ensure that Informix is never blamed for a
system crash in the future ....
Blair Adamache
Brandt Edwin
but it's so much fun to make fun of the big dogs.
let us poor groundlings enjoy our penny's worth of laughter.
sometimes a joke is just a joke.
>>> Daniel Morgan <damo...@exxesolutions.com> 07/28/03 11:29AM >>>
Mark A wrote:
What a blivet.
In an environment as complex as Orbitz's a crash could be caused by
many things.
Hardware, operating systems, networks, routers, hubs, databases, tools,
etc.
etc. etc. right down to a poorly run code review on some internally
generated
program or a DBA or SysAdmin that made an innocent mistake.
But you are so knee-jerk negative toward Larry, who I doubt has ever
taken a
single dollar from your pocket, you jump to a conclusion the size of
Mt.
Everest. Give it a break.
As Freud once said ... "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
Do the universe a favor. Wait for the facts to come out: They will.
Then comment
on the facts. If they demonstrate Oracle was responsible so what. Has
DB2 never
been responsible for a crash? Informix? Sybase? A 'C' compiler?
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/extinfo/certprog/oad/oad_crs.asp
damo...@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
sending to informix-list
Daniel Morgan
> It's possible that DB2, Informix, Sybase and 'C' compilers have all
> caused crashes. Never heard of a C compiler crash that interrupted
> production and got the same level of coverage as Orbitz did in eWeek and
> Computerworld. I guess when you buy the back page of the Economist and
> Businessweek and use the word "Unbreakable", you attract a little more
> attention - the same way a blivet attracts flies.
>
> <snipped>
So now Larry is responsible for the amount of news coverage? What has the amount of
coverage got to do with anything?
I thought we were involved in technology not marketing hyperbole. Leave the P/R
nonsense to the weasels. Yep Oracle put out the phrase "Unbreakable". P&G put out the
phrase "Whiter and brighter"? That's what they pay people in marketing to do in lieu
of having real jobs. Or don't you remember when someone got paid a lot of money to
add UDB to DB2? So why do you go after one and not the other? Perhaps some axe to
grind because you have a religious devotion to one band of toothpaste over another?
Unless you are holding a major portion of your assets in common shares on the NYSE or
NASDAQ I'd keep in mind that we are all here for the paycheck. And who wins the
marketing wars matters not one dollar to what we take home and use to pay the bills.
If Oracle was at fault so be it. But jumping on Ault's posting with a reference about
Larry buying the company to cover for a mistake crosses a line somewhere between
irrational and paranoid.
Daniel Morgan
Got about as much use for him as I do for Bill. Neither one has me on their
payroll. The Larry reference was just repeating the statement from the OP.
"... even if Larry ..."
Keep in mind I worked in DB2 long before Oracle. And even today move back and
forth between RDBMS products for what I do. Even Teradata which, in some
respects, is the best of them all.
JEDIDIAH
> If it turns out to be a hardware issue, of great interest would be how
> vulnerable RAC is to "hardware issues" - relational databases and
> operating systems have to deal with bad disks and failing processors all
> the time. But, a highly available software solution should not have
> single points of failure.
That is not something that the software vendor is responsible for.
The software vendor can certainly give appropriate advice. However, it
is always up to the end user to carry those directives out. The end user
maintains ultimate control over the environment and is always in the
position to unintentionally sabotage an application.
[deletia]
Darin McBride
> Blair Adamache wrote:
>
>> It's possible that DB2, Informix, Sybase and 'C' compilers have all
>> caused crashes. Never heard of a C compiler crash that interrupted
>> production and got the same level of coverage as Orbitz did in eWeek and
>> Computerworld. I guess when you buy the back page of the Economist and
>> Businessweek and use the word "Unbreakable", you attract a little more
>> attention - the same way a blivet attracts flies.
>>
>> <snipped>
>
> So now Larry is responsible for the amount of news coverage? What has the
> amount of coverage got to do with anything?
I think the point is much more simple than you want to admit:
* Oracle advertises "unbreakable".
* (It is claimed that) Oracle broke.
All I can say is that I hope that Oracle execs (who must have approved of
the "unbreakable" campaign) have lots of seasoning to add taste to their
feet.
> I thought we were involved in technology not marketing hyperbole. Leave
> the P/R nonsense to the weasels. Yep Oracle put out the phrase
> "Unbreakable". P&G put out the phrase "Whiter and brighter"? That's what
> they pay people in marketing to do in lieu
> of having real jobs. Or don't you remember when someone got paid a lot of
> money to add UDB to DB2? So why do you go after one and not the other?
1. I've not heard of anyone saying, "Here's some data that can't be stored
in the Universal database."
2. I've not heard anyone claim that DB2 is the only "universal" database.
Daniel Morgan
At one level I agree with you. Nothing is unbreakable. It is impossible to
conceive of a product that put on the wrong hardware, hosted on the wrong
operating system, run through the wrong web server, used to execute bad code,
and managed by a bunch of monkeys wouldn't break. Anyone that believes otherwise
is dummer than a bag of hammers.
Assuming you, and others, bear no relationship to the above referenced bag ...
why the literal interpretation of what is clearly marketing hyperbole?
Andrew Hamm
> GOD!! sometimes I just HATE the internet. It is too easy to be
> misinterpreted. My suggestions were tongue in cheek. I TOTALLY get
> marketing. I was just commenting on how marketing departments can
> embarrass their companies.
EVERYONE (not just you, Tom, but you mentioned the internet first:) has
forgotten the Golden Rule of the Internet:
Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you
win, you are still retarded.
Apologies etc etc to any handicapped people or their carers etc etc etc.
It's time people stopped being so bloody precious about the products they've
invested their careers in. It ain't a gift from the Gods, it's a product.
Wrapped in plastic and Marketing Drivel.
Jim Kennedy
reliability. In their research the authors looked at root causes and found
that 51% of the time the cause was human error or cause.(poor administration
etc.). I believe 15% of the time it was a hardware failure and the
remainder was software failure. In all probability it was an administration
error (which could happen to any system). Usually, these things are caused
by more than one thing and it is a series of mistakes and mishaps that cause
the problem. Unlikely Orbitz is going to make known all the gory details no
matter who was at fault. (likely several entities - people, software,
hardware, etc. - were at fault.)
What is important is how the vendors respond to a crisis. Sure you don't
want to have a crisis very often, but when you do how does the vendor
respond. Having worked for many years with Oracle and other vendors (eg
Microsoft) on some very critical issues I have to say Oracle beats Microsoft
hands down in addressing and doing something about production critical
problems.(no comment on DB2, or Informix, I never had a chance to test their
support in a critical situation because I have not used their products very
much.)
Jim
Mark Townsend
Well - In 1983 I had a 300 line COBOL program that whenever you compiled
it would cause the mainframe to abend. Seriously. We could never work
out why - change one character of the program, and the problem would go
away. Used to love giving the Sys Admin a hard time by threatening to
compile it unless he ran my batch job NOW !
My other favourite from that era was Get Mains for memory allocation.
The MF OS had a fixed upper limit to how many it stored in a mapping
table - (256 I believe). Along came #257, and it would quite happily
start poking the new single byte map reference into the location in the
memory stack. One customer had this problem where the 8 bits overwritten
coincidently where also the static boolean constants for Yes/No and
True/False (which suddenly became set to their opposite values) in their
program logic.
So every test for True and False, Yes and No in the code suddenly
started acting backwards, after the series of code executed that cased
the 1 too many get mains - in a 12 million line program. Took two of us
a week to work that one out.
Nuno Souto
>
> 1. I've not heard of anyone saying, "Here's some data that can't be stored
> in the Universal database."
> 2. I've not heard anyone claim that DB2 is the only "universal" database.
Surely you *must* have heard some1 "alleging"
UDB is *not* DB2, not the same product, not the
same code base? :D
It all goes with the semantics...
If you want to split hairs, I think
there is *PLENTY* of prior experience
showing it can be done in both directions.
A suggestion is: let it rest until more is known.
Otherwise, the opportunity is there for plenty of
bidirectional dis-information exchange. Also known in
technical circles as marketing BS.
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam
Neil Truby
news:bg4igl$krfib$2...@ID-79573.news.uni-berlin.de...
> It's time people stopped being so bloody precious about the products
they've
> invested their careers in. It ain't a gift from the Gods, it's a product.
> Wrapped in plastic and Marketing Drivel.
Except of course Informix, which has generally been refershingly free of any
marketing, drivellous or otherwise.
Noons
--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam
"Neil Truby" <neil....@ardenta.com> wrote in message news:bg3q93$kpp1o$1...@ID-162943.news.uni-berlin.de...
John Carlson
Well, there was that race car . . . . . .8-)
Joel Garry
>
> Just a rumor mind you, but the Orbitz glitch has been traced to some
> hardware issues...will post more if I hear more.
>
> Mike
SUN or commodity? Enquiring minds want to know!
(Having personally observed SUN controller lie to computer, and having
serious doubts about commodity hardware being any better, I will laugh
'till I puke if it was a controller issue).
(disclaimer: I own a small amount of stock in JNI).
jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
But I haven't lost money.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20030627-9999_1b27ipo1.html
Darin McBride
Is it marketing hyberbole when Sun advertises 99.999% uptime? Generally, I
take anything that is subjective to be hyperbole ("Coffee Crisp is a nice,
light snack" - whether it is nice, light, or a snack [vs breakfast] is all
pretty subjective). Anything that is objectively verifiable, I, and I
suspect many others, would take much more literally.
If Sun only manages 99.99% uptime, don't you think that their competitors
would call them on it? Someone may make a decision, after reading spec
sheets, to go with a certain vendor based on those spec sheets, and a
competitor proving the spec sheets were wrong would likely also be factored
in somewhere. Oracle claimed 100% uptime. Yes, you and I know that's
basically impossible. But that's the claim. And it's not a subjective
one.
In short: don't make marketing claims that you can't back up. That's not
hyperbole. That's lying. Even if it's wishful thinking, it's still lying
because it is said with such an air of confidence that the confidence is
the lie (it's unknown and said as if known).
I wouldn't expect any differently should my own employer be caught lying
like that. (Personally, I'd be affronted if they tried, and may even think
about employment elsewhere, and this I'm saying even though my second-line
manager is participating on this thread.) I don't expect untruths to be
masqueraded as "hyperbole" in one place any different than any other place,
whether that's Oracle, MS, IBM, or any other vendor.
Noons
Hang on, that was WingZ.
Hang on, that was Informix's
product too... :D
PS: still use it...
--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam
"John Carlson" <john_c...@whsmithusa.com> wrote in message news:hj1divgbkdfp23pe9...@4ax.com...
Blair Adamache
eWeek: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1196879,00.asp
Daniel Morgan
How quickly some forget that every family has "one of 'them' " and that every company has a marketing weasel that
thinks they enhance the world be corrupting the use of words to communicate with clarity. We have a choice ... we
can all wait for our time to come ... or just make technology decisions based on technology rather than slogans.
Pity those that can't tell thedifference.
Joel Garry
> I believe Orbitz is also running Sun and Veritas, at least according to
> eWeek: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1196879,00.asp
Yeah, that was the article we were laughing about in another thread,
where the spokesbimbo said the database people are really smart guys.
We still don't know what the real architecture is (of course, I tend
to be a day or two behind on all this), Mike posted in another thread
something about a rumor that it could have been due to a NIC driver
problem on a Dell. My speculation is they have both Suns and Dell's
still for various purposes. Maybe their "rearchitecting in a day"
really meant turning off the Dells and turning back on the old Sun :-)
The RAC was dissed by Dell
The RAC was dissed by Dell
Hi Ho the Verio
The RAC was dissed by Dell
A few days ago, a local university TV station rebroadcast a Q/A with
Michael Dell from last May. He said he had a framed Forbes (IIRC)
magazine cover on his desk - it was the "Entrepreneur of the Year, Ken
Olsen." My wife heard that and went "Who's that?" as I cracked up.
So what can we learn from all this?
"Guaranteed no data loss" does not mean your business hasn't been
shutdown. It only means you might be able to get something up to a
point in time. The lost business/transactions beyond that don't
count.
Failover can fall over.
People still don't understand that hardware is prone to failure,
misconfiguration, integration problems, insufficient quality control,
and general abuse of statistical forecasting of failure. Commodity
hardware compounds these issues. Software can only handle so much of
it. Management can only handle so much of software.
Murphy was an optimist.
>
> Joel Garry wrote:
> > mike...@earthlink.net (Mike Ault) wrote in message news:<37fab3ab.0307...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> >>Just a rumor mind you, but the Orbitz glitch has been traced to some
> >>hardware issues...will post more if I hear more.
> >>
> >>Mike
> >
> >
> > SUN or commodity? Enquiring minds want to know!
> >
> > (Having personally observed SUN controller lie to computer, and having
> > serious doubts about commodity hardware being any better, I will laugh
> > 'till I puke if it was a controller issue).
> >
> > (disclaimer: I own a small amount of stock in JNI).
> >
> > jg
> > --
> > @home.com is bogus.
> > But I haven't lost money.
> > http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20030627-9999_1b27ipo1.html
jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
They invented the Internet, now bet on Terrorist Futures!
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/wed/news/news_1n30futures.html
Daniel Morgan
Joel Garry wrote:
> The RAC was dissed by Dell
> The RAC was dissed by Dell
> Hi Ho the Verio
> The RAC was dissed by Dell
And all along I thought it was "Hi Ho the Veritas"
Joel Garry
> Joel Garry wrote:
>
> > The RAC was dissed by Dell
> > The RAC was dissed by Dell
> > Hi Ho the Verio
> > The RAC was dissed by Dell
>
> And all along I thought it was "Hi Ho the Veritas"
You got it, I actually wondered for a minute, then decided, what the
heck, throw in the Nipponese misdirection since being closer to the
original rhyme will stick better in people's braincaches. Verio is an
NTT company expanding hosting rapidly in Asian markets, and Dell is
rapidly expanding hardware in Asian markets. And I've had a bad
experience with Verio in the US hosting market. Or someone, they all
sound alike.
jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
Bwahaha.