 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New schrieb:
> As of today, all 39 production computers are sending critical failure
> messages to my email *and* via SMS to my cell phone. @Whee.
>
Wait until they start to fail ...
I cursed the day my company gave me a cell phone!
OTOH computers are patient.
Good Luck!
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > As of today, all 39 production computers are sending critical failure
> > messages to my email *and* via SMS to my cell phone. @Whee.
>
> Or rather, they would, were they sending such messages. You know what I
> mean.
In fact I did NOT know what you meant - I thought you were complaining about
them constantly sending you failures!
....Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Darren New wrote:
>> As of today, all 39 production computers are sending critical failure
>> messages to my email *and* via SMS to my cell phone. @Whee.
>
> Or rather, they would, were they sending such messages. You know what I
> mean.
>
Hmm, I don't get it. Is the milestone that you got all computers to send
messages on failure, or that all computers had a critical failure at the
same time? :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:49:34 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> As of today, all 39 production computers are sending critical failure
> messages to my email *and* via SMS to my cell phone. @Whee.
Here's hoping they don't all go off at the same time. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
> Nice. How much work did that involve?
Keeping an eye on everything running is a fairly major subsystem of the
network of machines. (We need machines physically in various cities for
reasons I'm not yet allowed to describe.) But since I've done this kind
of thing a couple times before (well, not to this scale, but...), I knew
the basic setup we needed.
I was actually thinking about writing it up, in a sort of "how to design
a mid-sized distributed management system" sort of way. Certainly
nothing at a google or amazon level, but the sort of thing that a
handful of people at a startup would like to know.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> As of today, all 39 production computers are sending critical failure
>>> messages to my email *and* via SMS to my cell phone. @Whee.
>>
>> Or rather, they would, were they sending such messages. You know what
>> I mean.
>>
> Hmm, I don't get it. Is the milestone that you got all computers to send
> messages on failure, or that all computers had a critical failure at the
> same time? :)
Sorry. Bad wording. The milestone is that the software and the
monitoring subsystem is working well enough that the author of the code
(i.e., me) is willing to actually get calls on the cell phone for every
failure.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Gail Shaw" <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote in
news:47232b1c@news.povray.org:
>
> "Steve" <ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet> wrote in message
> news:Xns99D67251B64C7stevezeroppsuklinuxn@203.29.75.35...
>
>> Another name that's still around after all these years. Are you still
>> Angbanding?
>
> Nope. Don't have the time.
>
I don't either, but I don't let that stop me - to my detriment.
Steve
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote
> As of today, all 39 production computers are sending critical failure
> messages to my email *and* via SMS to my cell phone. @Whee.
Of course you and Murphy know that the messaging subsystem will be the first
one to be decomisioned by the failure, right?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> Of course you and Murphy know that the messaging subsystem will be the first
> one to be decomisioned by the failure, right?
I get periodic "the message subsystem is working" messages too. BTDTGTTS.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Of course you and Murphy know that the messaging subsystem will be the
>> first
>> one to be decomisioned by the failure, right?
>
> I get periodic "the message subsystem is working" messages too. BTDTGTTS.
"Hi! This is your system speaking. Just to let you know that there's
absolutely nothing I need to let you know. I just woke you up at 2 AM to
tell you that. Bye!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
