> On 16/01/2012 12:36 PM, Tom Austin wrote:
>
>> We do have some methods to getting back up relatively quickly - tho they
>> are not instantaneous. Management is now willing to spend the money
>> where needed - tho I don't think we will go to fail-safe quite yet.
>
> Yeah, it's funny... I've noticed this strange correlation between
> expensive down-time and management willingness to invest in
> fault-tolerant equipment. ;-)

One of my all-time favorite post-mortem meetings went something like this:

Background info: there was a major catastrophe the night before.  A 
repeat of prevous incidents.  As a result, our customer made the news.

10:45am: we meet with our management to quickly explain to the big 
bosses what happened, what we did to resolve it, and how we wrote this 
nice proposal six months ago to permanently deal with the issue.  Big 
Boss says "we'll try to steer clear of We-Told-You-So, but we'll also 
remind them that this could have been avoided.  Let me do the talking 
and jump in if I mess up on my technical mumbo-jumbo"

11:00am: We walk in the customer's board room.  Before we're fully 
seated, the CIO opens up by saying "We know you told us so last time, 
but... is there something else we can do other than upgrade these 
Whatchamacallits?"

...

It took them two more major incidents - including one where they ended 
up on the cover of Time Magazine - before those old whatchamacallits 
were removed.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message