On 8 Jul 2008 14:19:25 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL >> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 4:13 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Going unsupported - time to fold? >> >> >I don't recall very much, but I do remember Dallas, TX >> having some problem when they converted from an "old" system >> to a "new" one. IIRC, the new one was slower and some >> prisoner records were not properly >> transferred, resulting in some local inmates being released >> when they shouldn't have been. >> >> >> That's not a technology issue! >> It's a competence issue! >> >> - > >True. But I think it was also a "hurry and convert to save money" issue >as well. That's what I get from the OP's post as a perceived benefit. >The city wants to save money and do it quickly. Doing things quickly >often results in things being overlooked. Like what to do with 6 year >old tapes with legal requirements to keep for 10 years. And what do to >with the obsolete applications which process that data.
If things I have seen over the past years are any example, there are a number of files / backups in many (most?) shops that can not be read with the same interpretation as when written. Actually we need a good methodology to be able save and recreate past processing. > >It also reminds me of some projects that have gone on here in the past. >They were developed and tested. They worked well and were well received >by the users. But when a full load was placed on them (600 users vs. 10 >testers), they crashed and burned. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
