Yesterday someone issued an RO *ALL,V 708-7014,OFFLINE which led to a
number of unplanned IPLs.
Now mgmt wants to implement a fingerchecker.
I searched CBT for a command exit that might ask something like "you
really want to vary 26,000 devices offline?"
How do others shops handle t
On Oct 19, 2007, at 9:13 AM, Field, Alan C. wrote:
Yesterday someone issued an RO *ALL,V 708-7014,OFFLINE which led to a
number of unplanned IPLs.
Now mgmt wants to implement a fingerchecker.
I searched CBT for a command exit that might ask something like "you
really want to vary 26,000 d
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Field, Alan C.
>
> Yesterday someone issued an RO *ALL,V 708-7014,OFFLINE which
> led to a number of unplanned IPLs.
>
> Now mgmt wants to implement a fingerchecker.
>
> I searched CBT for a command exit that mig
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Field, Alan C.
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:14 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: VARY too many devices offline
>
> Yesterday someone issued an RO
>
>Not being to tongue in cheek here.. but we used to fire the operator.
>
>Ed
>
And what good does that do to the integrity of your systems???
Does that prevent anyone else from making a mistake?
Did you never make a typo in any of the commands you ever entered? (If you
never did, then that m
On Oct 22, 2007, at 7:05 AM, Jan MOEYERSONS wrote:
Not being to tongue in cheek here.. but we used to fire the operator.
Ed
And what good does that do to the integrity of your systems???
Does that prevent anyone else from making a mistake?
Did you never make a typo in any of the commands
Color me disbelieving.
I think in the 30+ years I have been around OS360 and MVS and z/os,
there has never been an operator mistake of a typo.
Not buying this, either:
I have seen operators make errors but the OS has caught all of
them and no harm was done.
Jan's take is correct: ou
On Oct 22, 2007, at 2:38 PM, Jon Brock wrote:
Color me disbelieving.
I think in the 30+ years I have been around OS360 and MVS and z/os,
there has never been an operator mistake of a typo.
Not buying this, either:
I have seen operators make errors but the OS has caught all of
them and no h
On 22 Oct 2007 12:56:30 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon Brock) wrote:
>Color me disbelieving.
>
>I think in the 30+ years I have been around OS360 and MVS and z/os,
>there has never been an operator mistake of a typo.
I liked the time where the Vax operator put in a date a century in the
futur
This is exactly why there are products like CA OPS/MVS and Automan and
probably a few others. People sometimes are new to a procedure, they do
accidentally make mistakes, and read and write instructions incorrectly. It
is up to the systems management to make sure that proper process is in place
to
On Oct 22, 2007, at 3:58 PM, Howard Brazee wrote:
On 22 Oct 2007 12:56:30 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon Brock) wrote:
Color me disbelieving.
I think in the 30+ years I have been around OS360 and MVS and z/os,
there has never been an operator mistake of a typo.
I liked the time where the Vax
> Operators (especially console operators) are extremely competent and if
> they screw up, IMO, they need to be fired.
As a systems programmer I'm glad I wasn't fired every time I screwed something
up.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
-
Operators (especially console operators) are extremely competent and
if they screw up, IMO, they need to be fired.
That's just ridiculous.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1085 - Release Date: 22/10/2007
10:35
hopping quite often.
Something about an old saying "let him who is without sin cast the first
stone"
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Kenny Fogarty
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 5:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.
ichael J Flores
Triumph Performance and Technical Architecture AMEX
Bob Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
10/22/2007 02:33 PM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: VARY too many devices offline
&g
It’s the concept of "one strike, you're out!" that I find amazing. What
constitutes a mistake serious enough to put someone's livelihood at stake?
With that kind of pressure hanging over anyone, how can they be expected to
learn, and grow and enhance the company they're working for?
I think we've
On Oct 22, 2007, at 5:41 PM, Kenny Fogarty wrote:
It’s the concept of "one strike, you're out!" that I find amazing.
What
constitutes a mistake serious enough to put someone's livelihood at
stake?
With that kind of pressure hanging over anyone, how can they be
expected to
learn, and grow a
>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 8:17 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> How would you handle a person that scrutinizes blood for a living and
> mistakes a diagnosis ?
I'm sure it happens multiple times a day, all over the country. I doubt very
much t
In a message dated 10/22/2007 5:09:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Operators (especially console operators) are extremely competent and if
they screw up, IMO, they need to be fired.
>That's just ridiculous.
I have seen operators who knew much more about what ce
On Oct 22, 2007, at 8:00 PM, Mark Post wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 8:17 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
How would you handle a person that scrutinizes blood for a living and
mistakes a diagnosis ?
I'm sure it happens multiple times a day, al
>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:31 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> I don't believe that its a matter of "first error" but what the error
> was.
This was your argument for most of this thread. Good to see you abandon it.
Even so, I'm glad I never
On Oct 22, 2007, at 11:28 PM, Mark Post wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:31 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
I don't believe that its a matter of "first error" but what the error
was.
This was your argument for most of this thread. Good to see
>
> How would you handle a person that scrutinizes blood for a living and
> mistakes a diagnosis ?
> In some case an operator is just as "guilty" as the blood analyzer.
> If you say thats not the same, I would agree but not in all
I wouldn't even begin to make the analogy. But, mistakes happen.
Th
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:54:31 +0100, Kenny Fogarty wrote:
>I agree, but, if the wrong date, or IPL parm, or whatever is entered,
>then the chances are you're going to have to re-IPL to rectify the
>situation. As you said above, if RACF doesn't start, you can go back
>to see why, and take steps to f
"Zaromil Tisler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:54:31 +0100, Kenny Fogarty wrote:
>
> >I agree, but, if the wrong date, or IPL parm, or whatever is entered,
> >then the chances are you're going to have to re-IPL to rectify the
> >situation
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Shannon
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 4:34 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: VARY too many devices offline
>
>
> > Operators (especially co
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Bob Shannon
>
> > Operators (especially console operators) are extremely
> competent and
> > if they screw up, IMO, they need to be fired.
>
> As a systems programmer I'm glad I wasn't fired every time I
> screwed
I hate to even think about the pain that might have caused.
Jon
or the operator who put a future date at IPL time and really screwed
up RACF. (story I heard from another company)
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archiv
On 22 Oct 2007 14:12:07 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Zahir Hemini)
wrote:
>This is exactly why there are products like CA OPS/MVS and Automan and
>probably a few others. People sometimes are new to a procedure, they do
>accidentally make mistakes, and read and write instructions incorrectly.
Which
On 22 Oct 2007 18:43:18 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What
>should happen to a computer operator in the US Marine Corps whose typo causes
>an infantry platoon to be destroyed by friendly fire or a human error
>resulting in a $1 loss? One size does not fit all. Let the punishment fit
>
Yes, I quite agree with you. At our organization we do brainstorm about what
could potentially go wrong and we admit that humans are error prone for a
whole variety of reasons. So we do try to have contingencies planned as well
as procedures to catch gross errors. My management is very strict that
On Oct 23, 2007, at 9:51 AM, Jon Brock wrote:
I hate to even think about the pain that might have caused.
Jon
Jon,
A person here on the list had to go through the exercise maybe he
will speak up and give details.
Ed
-
On Oct 23, 2007, at 3:17 AM, Zaromil Tisler wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:54:31 +0100, Kenny Fogarty wrote:
I agree, but, if the wrong date, or IPL parm, or whatever is entered,
then the chances are you're going to have to re-IPL to rectify the
situation. As you said above, if RACF doesn't sta
On Oct 23, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Kenny Fogarty wrote:
How would you handle a person that scrutinizes blood for a living and
mistakes a diagnosis ?
In some case an operator is just as "guilty" as the blood analyzer.
If you say thats not the same, I would agree but not in all
I wouldn't even begin
I had a problem with IPLing I think a year behind the current date. This
was running under VM. VM was IPL'd with the wrong date, passing the date
along to each guest. We had 5 DOS guests, one MVS guest, and one VS1 guest
at the time. This was our first conversion of one of the DOS guests to
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 19:48:11 -0500, Eric Bielefeld wrote:
>I had a problem with IPLing I think a year behind the current date. This
>was running under VM. VM was IPL'd with the wrong date, passing the date
>along to each guest.
...snip...
>The only problem after coming back up was that anyone
Tom,
No one died, and no one got fired either.
Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
414-475-7434
- Original Message -
From: Tom Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Eric,
>
> Nobody died as a result of the operator error, right? ;)
>
> --
> Tom Schmidt
> Madiso
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ed Gould
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 6:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VARY too many devices offline
On Oct 23, 2007, at 3:17 AM, Zaromil Tisler wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007
I had a problem with IPLing I think a year behind the current date.
This was running under VM. VM was IPL'd with the wrong date, passing
the date along to each guest. We had 5 DOS guests, one MVS guest, and
one VS1 guest at the time. Thi
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 18:29:02 -0500, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I wish the person this had happened to would pipe up, but to set the
>record more precisely because of a bad date RACF (This is hear say)
>did something to the (RACF) database that essentially rendered the
>system not operat
On Oct 25, 2007, at 9:19 AM, David Long wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 18:29:02 -0500, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wish the person this had happened to would pipe up, but to set the
record more precisely because of a bad date RACF (This is hear say)
did something to the (RACF) database t
d don't replace them.
My $0.02 (before taxes)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jan MOEYERSONS
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 7:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VARY too many devices offline
>
>Not being to
David Long wrote:
In 1989 I was working in a shop where the operator accidentally entered the
ipl date as yy/mm/98 instead of yy/mm/89. This was not noticed until all the
jobs that read tapes started failing because the tape datasets had expired.
I ended up writing a little program to make th
Ed - You sure have a thing about firing people. Its a good thing you're not
employed now, as you can't fire anyone. Lets look at some of the costs of
firing a bunch of consultants. Lets just say there were 5 consultants who
did what you described. Say the average time they have been working
On Oct 25, 2007, at 1:50 PM, Eric Bielefeld wrote:
Ed - You sure have a thing about firing people. Its a good thing
you're not employed now, as you can't fire anyone. Lets look at
some of the costs of firing a bunch of consultants. Lets just say
there were 5 consultants who did what you
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ed Gould
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VARY too many devices offline
Eric:
What would you do with dishonest consultants?
A clue was given
I guess I saw the part about turning SMF recording off, but it didn't
register. Yes, if they were stealing services or committing some act of
fraud, maybe they should get fired. I used the quote below more because I
was getting fed up with Ed Gould's constant talk of firing people. I know I
>I was getting fed up with Ed Gould's constant talk of firing people.
Ed has been retired for so long that any opinion he has is not worth listening
to.
>From STAR TREK ("Friday's Child"):
His words are unimportant, and we do not hear them!
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
What would you do with dishonest consultants?
I'd be taking one really HARD LOOK at the selection process! Let's treat
the whole problem, not just the most obvious symptom!
th my company.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Fochtman
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 6:53 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VARY too many devices offline
What would you do with dishonest consul
On Oct 25, 2007, at 5:52 PM, Rick Fochtman wrote:
What would you do with dishonest consultants?
I'd be taking one really HARD LOOK at the selection process! Let's
treat the whole problem, not just the most obvious symptom!
Rick,
The cons
Where do these scenarios get dreamed up? If you have a services issue, then
you can always fire someone if they aren't living up to the terms (or your
perception) of an agreement. If you're wrong, then a lawsuit by the other
party may help clear things up.
If you suspect something criminal, by a
On Oct 25, 2007, at 4:21 PM, Eric Bielefeld wrote:
I guess I saw the part about turning SMF recording off, but it
didn't register. Yes, if they were stealing services or committing
some act of fraud, maybe they should get fired. I used the quote
below more because I was getting fed up wit
On Oct 25, 2007, at 4:29 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I was getting fed up with Ed Gould's constant talk of firing people.
Ed has been retired for so long that any opinion he has is not
worth listening to.
From STAR TREK ("Friday's Child"):
His words are unimportant, and we do not hear them!
-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
Of Field, Alan C.
Sent: 19 October 2007 15:14
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: VARY too many devices offline
Yesterday someone issued an RO *ALL,V 708-7014,OFFLINE which led to a
number of unplanned IPLs.
Now mgmt wants to
On Oct 25, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Gerhard Adam wrote:
Where do these scenarios get dreamed up? If you have a services
issue, then
you can always fire someone if they aren't living up to the terms
(or your
perception) of an agreement. If you're wrong, then a lawsuit by
the other
party may help
On Oct 25, 2007, at 7:13 PM, Tony wrote:
Lots of people had there 2cents worth so I might as well give mine.
A max units offline in SYSPARMS would kill this forever and surely
take
10/20 minutes to code.
Does anyone ever ask IBM to do anything these days or do we just
sit back
and take w
t [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jan MOEYERSONS
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 7:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: VARY too many devices offline
Not being to tongue in cheek here.. but we used to fire the operator.
Ed
And what good does that do to the integrity of your systems???
In a message dated 10/25/2007 1:15:00 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> What would you do with dishonest consultants?
The same thing you do with dishonest interns, trainees, employees, managers,
CEOs, Chairmen of the Board, etc. And it depends on who "you" is. A "you"
wit
On Oct 28, 2007, at 8:07 AM, (IBM Mainframe Discussion List) wrote:
In a message dated 10/25/2007 1:15:00 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What would you do with dishonest consultants?
The same thing you do with dishonest interns, trainees, employees,
managers,
CEOs, Cha
Q: What would you do with dishonest consultants?
A: The same thing you do with dishonest interns, trainees, employees,
managers, CEOs, Chairmen of the Board, etc. And it depends on who "you"
is. A "you" with sufficient authority must be
61 matches
Mail list logo
