Hmm do we work for the same company?

 

Regards,

 

Chris Orovet  





 

From: James Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 3:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Change control (was RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC)

 

I've worked for a number of outsourcing companies and the change control
is always very tight. It's the only way they can do it, but I admit it
is completely inflexible for the client - particularly those that retain
IT staff who now have to watch their systems managed by others who don't
understand the particular intricacies of the business or the
infrastructure.

You are right about good change control being right in the middle of the
change control spectrum. Can't say I've ever found a company that
managed to strike the balance exactly right though.

The reason my boss gets away with his cowboy approach is because he is
prepared to sit there for 36 hours+ trying to get it working. I, on the
other hand, am not. He bodges solutions together and then expects me to
sanitize them and make them supportable.I love his approach though - he
breaks something, then sends an email out to let users know that it is
broken, and then puts the fastest fix in place he can find - usually
reverting to where he started. He once deleted a snapshot I took before
I'd finished testing, and made me completely unable to roll back my
changes. He never seems to face any repercussions because our users (who
are probably used to things packing up during the day) are happy as long
as they get informed as to what's busted. Things would be much smoother
if I could run them my way, but that's unlikely to happen because he is
popular amongst the golf-playing directorship (ain't it always the
same?) I, on the other hand, prefer boxing to golf and have an
unfortunate habit of calling a spade a spade, which seems to preclude me
from breaking into the management "click". Ho-hum. Still - it's only ten
minutes drive from home :-)

2009/8/31 David Lum <david....@nwea.org>

I totally understand the need for change control, but there certainly
are efficient ways to implement it. %DAYJOB% has good change control,
%FORMERDAYJOB% didn't.  To put names to it, I used to work for Textron
and they had good change control. After being there 10 years they
outsourced *some* of the IT infrastructure (the support portion, not the
programmers) to CSC and CSC's change control was insane.

 

I do realize leaving in these economic times is tougher, but it wouldn't
stop me from looking....

 

Does your boss not face any repercussions from deploying w/out testing?
I would use them as an opportunity to either work with him or go above
him with a plan on "this is how we should handle change, xxx problems
happened because we had no process and ExampleA and ExampleB problems
would have been prevented, here's how...."

 

Dave

 

From: James Rankin [mailto:kz2...@googlemail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 12:09 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC

 

The problem is all the companies with these stringent change control
processes have been, to speak proverbially, bitten squarely in the ass
by a lack of change control. I work for the polar opposite - a company
where no change control exists and where the head of IT makes changes,
often in the middle of the full working day, for no good operational
reason that result in loss of service on other, related systems. I have
also worked at companies with very strict change processes and know
which one I prefer, if I had to choose an extreme. My boss decided to
perform an upgrade to Active Directory 2008 not long ago and WebSense
has not functioned properly since, which is annoying when 25% of my
users are now browsing the net unfiltered. He upgraded our AppSense
server to 2008 and then I spent a week putting it back onto a 2003
system because he hadn't done any testing. I shudder to think what will
happen when he turns his upgrade-addicted eyes onto our Exchange 2007
infrastructure.

Of course, I am sure people would say "just leave", but we are in the
middle of a testing economic time and I have a wife recovering from an
operation and two hungry babies to feed. I'd rather work somewhere where
change control was a happy medium, but IMHO, tighter than a gnat's ass
beats the cowboy approach every time.

Apologies for taking the topic off on a tangent :-)

2009/8/31 David Lum <david....@nwea.org>

Sounds like they're trying hard not to be around very long if they are
so near sighted. Do they change the oil but not the filter on their cars
too?

 

Seems a simple matter of "my time at xx/hr = ThisMuch, vs this product +
install/setup/hardware = ThatMuch. Do ThisMuch x three months and
compare to ThatMuch spead over three months...

 

Seriously, the last job I had I LEFT because they had similar asinine
thinking (can't reboot a hung server unless you have it in Change Review
Board meeting and yes, you must attend the 1.5hr long meeting. 1.5HRS
for a hung system , hellloooo!!) . A company not thinking sensibly is a
company I will not work for.

 

Dave

 

From: tony patton [mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 8:08 AM


To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC

 

What I mean by no control is two-fold: 

1. I don't have any say over most of the policies, only a subset; 
2. We have to go through a long-winded change management process to do
any changes to GPOs. 

The things that run at start-up include software installs, reg-settings,
short-cut creation, some redundant, some could be better moved to
staging ou's. 

The main issue is due to the majority of PC's being about 5 years old
with 512mb ram, sometimes if they went any slower they'd be going
backwards. 
They're still only ordering them in with 1gb rather than spend a little
extra to get 2gb, it'll end up costing more in the long term, but they
only care about now. 

Not confusing start-up with logon, that's a whole other issue for
another time. 

Regards

Tony Patton
Desktop Operations Cavan
Ext 8078
Direct Dial 049 435 2878
email: tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com 

        
From: 

Jonathan Link <jonathan.l...@gmail.com> 

To: 

"NT System Admin Issues" <ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> 

                
Date: 

31/08/2009 15:30 

Subject: 

        Re: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC

 

________________________________




Out of curiosity, what exactly is running at machine startup (and why
can't you control it)?  Or are you confusing startup with logon?
Startup and logon are two distinct events, despite their close timing. 


  
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:18 AM, tony patton
<tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com> wrote: 
The reasoning for not using GPO's is the amount of things that are
already running on machine startup, no control over this. 

Machine shutdown GPO is an option. 

-sc, the reason I mentioned logging, or lack thereof, is that we're
pushing for a proper patch management/deployment system, there is
supposedly a project kicking off over the next few months for this.  I
can log by scripting it, that's not a problem, but we don't want a
PSEXEC deployment solution to do everything we need. 
We only need it in the interim, we don't want it as a long term
solution. 

To use PSEXEC long-term would be a full-time job, and we have enough to
do at the minute. 


Regards

Tony Patton
Desktop Operations Cavan
Ext 8078
Direct Dial 049 435 2878
email: tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com
<mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com>  

From: 

        "Sam Cayze" <sam.ca...@rollouts.com> 

To: 

"NT System Admin Issues" <ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
<mailto:ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> > 

        
                        
Date: 

31/08/2009 13:35 

        
Subject: 

RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC

        

 

________________________________





+1 
  
I just use psexec for the random one-off tasks. 
  
Sam 

________________________________

From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:kennedy...@elyriaschools.org
<mailto:kennedy...@elyriaschools.org>  

] 
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 6:57 AM 


To: NT System Admin Issues 


Subject: RE: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC 


Ok, I am going off in a completely different direction. I did not see
the part where you talked to others about PSEXEC so I don't know why you
are going in that direction. 
  
Why not just script it to the machines via GPO. If it is a machine
policy the install/update will run with elevated privs so you will not
have any trouble. You can get a run down on almost any app at this site,
as far as what switches and what package to use to get them deployed. 
  
http://www.appdeploy.com/ <http://www.appdeploy.com/>  
  
Your script can log the ip/machine name as it deploys..... 
  
  

From: tony patton [mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com
<mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com> ] 
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 5:59 AM


To: NT System Admin Issues


Subject: [On-Topic] Patching with PSEXEC 

  
Hey all, 

Following on from IE8 doesn't work thread, management here wants start
using PSEXEC to patch applications. 

I'm a bit hesitant to use it for patching 2800 desktops for Adobe
reader, flash, firefox and UltraVNC, fine for running scripts and such,
just not sure about patching. 

Logging is a whole other thing, personally, I don't want to be able to
log which machines were successful, failed or not on 
as there would be no incentive to get a proper patching solution. 
I can wrap a batch file around it to re-direct output to a file, so the
possibility of logging is there. 

What are the pitfalls that any of you that use this approach have come
across? 

Also thanks to Sam Cayze for the PSEXEC command for Adobe, hadn't
attempted to work out the command for Flash but this does it, saved me a
bit of work :-) 

Slightly off-topic, don't know why anyone would want to leave this list,
keeps me sane most days. 

Sorry if this is a bit all over the place, 11am and been here before 7
:-( 
All information greatly appreciated. 

Regards

Tony Patton
Desktop Operations Cavan
Ext 8078
Direct Dial 049 435 2878
email: tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com
<mailto:tony.pat...@quinn-insurance.com>  
==================================================================== 
http://www.quinn-insurance.com <http://www.quinn-insurance.com/>  
  

 

 




-- 
"On two occasions...I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put
into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am
not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could
provoke such a question."

http://raythestray.blogspot.com

 

 

 

 




-- 
"On two occasions...I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put
into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am
not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could
provoke such a question."

http://raythestray.blogspot.com

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to