Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
This reminds me of the Oklahoma Payroll debacle of the mid-1990's. The primary problem there was the new non-mf system contractors never checked the payroll data being sent to the Treasurer for check printing had the correct formats and data. The state finally went back to the mainframe system. I don't think they ever tried that stunt again. On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:10:25 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/10/2008 9:54:58 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: where somebody might say, gee, why not spend $c $a+$b to develop the software on the new platform? This question needs to be answered in management speak and not techie speak. And the only reason that I can think of would be risk avoidance. But is risk avoidance worth the cost ($a+$b-$c)? We've done similar things here and been told go ahead despite the risk. Sometimes it has worked fine, other times we were left with a mess. Isn't this a contract issue? Maybe ought to flush out on John Anderson's ISVCOSTs list. One of our bright VM'ers has been doing clean-up from a shaky conversion of one of S.D.'s neighbors for over three years at IBM contract rate. Loves it except for the sub-zero winters. -- 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
Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
Pat, I absolutely agree with your first statement below. I'm not sure I agree with the second half. My point was that there would most likely have been much less programming effort if they had decided to just make the required changes to the application to fulfill the law changes, leaving the application where it was, since they had a non-negotiable deadline. Then once the system was working, they could have had a second effort to migrate the system to the alternate platform, giving them the ability to fall back if they had problems of the magnitude they are having. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick O'Keefe Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 3:27 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues ... decided to use this law change as the reason to migrate the application off the mainframe. So, they had no fall-back ability in case of problems - ... To be fair, this problem had less to do with off the mainframe than onto a new application and no fallback. If the same project managers were involved, the migration would probably have gone no better if it had been to another application on the mainframe. Pat O'Keefe -- 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
Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex R. Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:43 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues Pat, I absolutely agree with your first statement below. I'm not sure I agree with the second half. My point was that there would most likely have been much less programming effort if they had decided to just make the required changes to the application to fulfill the law changes, leaving the application where it was, since they had a non-negotiable deadline. Then once the system was working, they could have had a second effort to migrate the system to the alternate platform, giving them the ability to fall back if they had problems of the magnitude they are having. Rex Though I agree with you, from a higher management viewpoint, it would sound something like: Lets spend $a dollars to upgrade the existing software for this new function. Once it is complete and working, we will spend $b more dollars to convert it to another platform. I can see where somebody might say, gee, why not spend $c $a+$b to develop the software on the new platform? This question needs to be answered in management speak and not techie speak. And the only reason that I can think of would be risk avoidance. But is risk avoidance worth the cost ($a+$b-$c)? We've done similar things here and been told go ahead despite the risk. Sometimes it has worked fine, other times we were left with a mess. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- 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
Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
In a message dated 7/10/2008 9:54:58 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: where somebody might say, gee, why not spend $c $a+$b to develop the software on the new platform? This question needs to be answered in management speak and not techie speak. And the only reason that I can think of would be risk avoidance. But is risk avoidance worth the cost ($a+$b-$c)? We've done similar things here and been told go ahead despite the risk. Sometimes it has worked fine, other times we were left with a mess. Isn't this a contract issue? Maybe ought to flush out on John Anderson's ISVCOSTs list. One of our bright VM'ers has been doing clean-up from a shaky conversion of one of S.D.'s neighbors for over three years at IBM contract rate. Loves it except for the sub-zero winters. **Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com! (http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus0005000112) -- 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
Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
-Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues From this week's TechTarget magazine(watch for line wrap here) http://www.mail2web.com/cgi-bin/redir.asp?lid=0newsite=http:/ /go.techtarget .com/r/3997279/567145 DJ Tinyurl to that site. http://preview.tinyurl.com/6o4oqe -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- 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
Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
Hi John, Interesting way for my home state to get in the media!! Unfortunately the state made a slight mistake in this implementation. The legislature decided to change the way license plates are handled when a vehicle gets sold. They switched from the plates going with the vehicle to the plates staying with the seller. There was a hard implementation date to get this change made. Unfortunately they apparently decided to use this law change as the reason to migrate the application off the mainframe. So, they had no fall-back ability in case of problems - which apparently are myriad. One of my co-workers said he heard the application needs to be cycled multiple times a day - either to keep it from crashing or because of crashes. Rex Subject: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues From this week's TechTarget magazine(watch for line wrap here) http://www.mail2web.com/cgi-bin/redir.asp?lid=0newsite=http:/ /go.techtarget .com/r/3997279/567145 DJ Tinyurl to that site. http://preview.tinyurl.com/6o4oqe -- 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
Re: South Dakota migrates off mainframe; chaos ensues
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 13:02:16 -0500, Pommier, Rex R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...They switched from the plates going with the vehicle to the plates staying with the seller. ... Way off topic, but I've had some cars with the bolts so rusted I'd never get the plates off. I guess I'd have to keep the car forever if I were from South Dakota. ... decided to use this law change as the reason to migrate the application off the mainframe. So, they had no fall-back ability in case of problems - ... To be fair, this problem had less to do with off the mainframe than onto a new application and no fallback. If the same project managers were involved, the migration would probably have gone no better if it had been to another application on the mainframe. Pat O'Keefe -- 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
