Re: Re(4): Faster Perl, Good and Bad News

A few years ago, my boss at the time came to me one day and said, "Don't make your self indespensible to me, cos if you do, I'll have to sack you!".

The relevance in this thread?

Any single machine that is so indispensible that it being down can cost $100,000, should be done away with, forthwith.

Why? Cos one day--sooner rather than later, and despite air-condition rooms, premium-grade, tested components, regular maintainance and all the TLC in the world--it's gonna fail. And Murphy's law, it's gonna do it just as that $100,000 contract is being finalised.

Comment on Re: Re(4): Faster Perl, Good and Bad News

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re(6): Faster Perl, Good and Bad News by FoxtrotUniform (Prior) on Aug 11, 2002 at 00:50 UTC
Any single machine that is so indispensible that it being down can cost $100,000, should be done away with, forthwith. If you can convince the sales staff not to pimp some shiny new feature until us implementation grunts have a solid, well-tested, reliable process in place, you'll never buy yourself another drink as long as we're in the same bar. How many times have you heard "Well, we don't have a backup box, and the software doesn't actually work yet, but we've promised the client this nifty new feature, so I guess you guys're working overtime for a few weeks"? No, it shouldn't happen. But it does. `-- F o x t r o t U n i f o r m Found a typo in this node? /msg me The hell with paco, vote for Erudil!`	[reply]
Re: Re(6): Faster Perl, Good and Bad News by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 11, 2002 at 00:59 UTC
Agreed! That's kinda why I didn't draw any real conclusions. Real-world always screws with "good practice". Still. The overtime usually comes in handy. So long as "they" take the rap, and don't take you "us" with'em, we'll be allright!	[reply]