| 1 |
On Wednesday 16 December 2009 01:34:33 Dale wrote: |
| 2 |
> > A real world scenario would be a bank server doing transactions. Those |
| 3 |
> > big irons do never ever get shut down. |
| 4 |
> > (But they also don't ever get really updated ;) |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Did you know, that they still use cobol-code from decades ago. The code |
| 7 |
> > has to interact with newer systems, but the existing code is not allowed |
| 8 |
> > to be altered, they just run it inside hugh java application servers on |
| 9 |
> > their main frames :D |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > Bye, |
| 12 |
> > Daniel |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Well, I wish someone would tell my bank that. They are down pretty |
| 16 |
> regular "upgrading" something. I use the term upgrading lightly here. |
| 17 |
> It usually makes things worse but anyway. They run windoze on their rig |
| 18 |
> so they most likely can't help that. ;-) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
They upgrade the *front*ends*, not the real stuff at the back. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Switching a mainframe off is not a supported activity :-) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Along those lines I could tell you some funny stories about monumental cockups |
| 25 |
banks do to their front ends (my S.O. does banking data warehousing), but I'm |
| 26 |
not actually supposed to know some of that stuff so I won't :-) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> Hearing they use old code is not to surprising actually. Look at air |
| 29 |
> traffic control. Every time they try to upgrade, it crashes. I guess |
| 30 |
> the cheapest bidder is not always the best. o_O |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Every such crash after an upgrade I know of is trying to run the thing on |
| 33 |
Windows... |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives