Future of short distance passenger flight is the drone

The world need a buss-sized drone that can replace short flights, specially for transport across water. A passenger drone travelling around 200 km/hr could easily outcompete commercial airlines where flight time for a jet is 1 hour or less due to a drone could take off and land from small spaces near a parking lot with more convenient locations than an airport.

I see a drone with:
- About 4 electrically driven propeller pods each side of a bus shaped body.
- 2 petrol engines to create the power, with separate fuel tanks for security.
- Batteries to boost power at takeoff and enough capacity to land safely if engines cut out.
- Each side would have separate controls for 2+2 pods, so if 1 set cut out the drone could still land safely.
- If landing on water the whole unit would be kept floating by airbags.
- Completely automated flight but a single attendant for safety and to control that eveybody has a ticket and handle unruliness.
- Remotely but cable connected pre-programmed flight destination to avoid possible hijackings.
- Flight controlled by gps, safety by radar and lidar.
- Laser based ground scan to find safe emergency landing spots.
- Around 50 passengers per drone for versatility and about 5-7 tons payload.
- Price for each unit would need to be in the Euro 500k to 1 million bracket to be competitive.

Public interest and safety would be satisfied by the buss-drones beeing owned by regulated entities, and production and maintenance could be strictly controlled. A separate commercial drone-buss flying zone could be regulated for around 500-1000 meters above ground level.

A nicer interior "private jet" version of the drone could be developed to replace helicopters and increase the market. Commuter routes into traffic congested city-centers is another market.

Internal training can lead to degregation and failure

If you source systems from outside sources but for cost-saving reasons purely rely on internal knowledge hand-over to get joiners up to speed, it may lead to degregation of the process.
Take a rapidly expanding company but strictly cost controlled like Ryanair. Many of their core systems are sourced from 3'rd parties but maintained in-house. However what worked yesterday and today might not be as effective tomorrow. Most companies throw more manpower at a problem. This is specially the case if non-technology people are set to solve system problems. And the users of the system may know no better because this is the way they do the process and that is the way their predecessors did it.
However the developers of the system might have come up with new solutions and ad-ons because other companies using the system also have experienced similar problems. And since these other companies have invested in from-the-source training, the resulting near contact have led them to ask if the processes can be automated better. These improvements cannot be picked up through internal training unless all system documentation are made easily and publicly available and somebody sees an interest in, and reward for, being up to date on all new developments. And many system developers keep new stufff close to their chest, as a competitive advantage.
Problem is many companies only reward new processes that leads to direct monetary rewards. Not for keeping going old-reliables that have always worked but are core to the successfull operation of the business.

Costs and risks are not clearly defined at the start of a crisis

Sometimes a purely bottom line focused company ends up coming to conclusions that make it spend more than if it took a more overall view. When Ryanair discovered it had scheduled more flights than it could man, it decided to cancel a number of them instead of the alternatives like;  temporarily wet-leasing (hiring with crew) aircraft from a different airline. And there was plenty of them around, proved by that the CAA could only a week later hire in a fleet of them to ferry home stranded customers after the Monarch collapse.
From a purely financial decision that might have been the correct thing to do if you where a company operating strictly by the book. However Ryanair are not exactly inundated with friends. Even their customers use them because they are the cheapest, completetly according to the Ryanair strategy, but still do not hold back in regular criticism on social media. And their enemies have been waiting for the right time to pounce. When that is the case you don't serve them up an opportunity on a silver platter.

Little could be done with the initial cancellations if it was a sudden realisation of lack of crew, or parts of management had already made the anouncement without mulling it over for a day or two. But there was just 2100 of them. The company had plenty of time to consider what to do with the rest of the season.
First they could have taken away the flights that had no seats sold on them. And according to their own statement and a simple calculation since 400 000 seats was sold on 18 000 flights, this could have meant at least halving the number to about 9000. 
Then consider political implications and UK pm May's dependence on Northern Irish support to stay in government and Scottish transport links to keep the country together. Political pressure is always more difficult to diffuse than bargain hunters that forget their principals when the next seat sale comes along.  
Then consider different financial scenarios where the best is that we get away with cancelling and everybody want refunds. A middle where a percentage is happy to take the buss and a voucher for goodwill. And the worst is we have to stick strictly to the letter/intention of the law and reaccommodate all 400 000 on competitors flights at grossly inflated prices plus sustenance and accomodation. And the likelihood of each one.
Is cancelling all still the best option, leasing in planes and crews to do all the flights, or a combination of the two.  What about when the risk associated with lack of goodwill, investors confidence, internal rumblings and future costs when new rules must be adhered to where before they could be diffused. 

Microsoft – Why have you abandoned us

Late 2012 I bought a Nokia Windows phone on a 2 yr contract. The OperatingSystem was version 7.1 and I thought I’d do some development with VB Express to make a few apps. Pretty quickly the severe limitations of the OS restricted further development and I moved on to Android which don’t have such ridiculous limits put on the OS for the device to pretend it has a better battery life.

I’m talking about a background running environment for 3’rd party apps.  Android has it, Microsoft’s OS for smartphones has not, Apple’s iPhone has one that is severely restricted.  Background running is the cornerstone of all fitness, tracking and logging apps. Without it you can’t get a continuous tracking, recording, logging or reporting of your position or activity. 

And what about the failures of the notification and alarm system. You can’t have a notification with an alternative sound, and an alarm won’t stop repeating without manual intervention. Where the management at MS deliberately trying to limit the availability of 3’rd party apps and the usability of the device. 

Microsoft is starting to see the folly of their ways and making some stuff available in newer versions, but it’s in 8.1 or even 10 of the OS. My Nokia smartphone is just 3 years old, of which 2yr was on a binding contract. It can’t take Windows 8 or higher, meaning it was left for dead by Microsoft even before the contract ran out. That quick abandonment, = OS upgrade stop, make it very difficult to move on to a newer hardware version. The trust is gone,. But worse than that, the market of potential users for apps utilizing the new features become severely limited. Further putting a damper on the incentive to make them in the first place. Even if the app uptake percentage might be higher because of the amount of abandoned users searching for new stuff in a limited market, the ad fill and value is shocking.

Problem is they treated smartphones like a phone instead of like a computer. OS for pc’s are kept updated for maybe 7 years..  And you can install the newest version of Windows 10 on pc’s that is even more than 5 years old. That Nokia was making the hardware is not an excuse. They took it over as a going concern, and surely for its dedicated customers.

You can follow my musings on the blog: http://vikingivestrled.blogspot.com

To have a look at our apps for Android, Apple(iPhone) or WinPhone, visit: http://www.moonc.mobi

Can you succeed in the mobile market without a million apps

First you need to get your priorities right.  Are you in the market to sell phones, apps, accessories,  ads or development tools. 

Some has a clear strategy, like Apple with all of the above, but at a price, and they did have the first out advantage.  Others like Google spread the different key parts out to partners like Samsung and Admob, and then if the partners become too successful, like Admob,  take them over.  Then we have the not so successful like RIM/Blackberry and Microsoft/Nokia. 

Blackberry tried to keep their stuff proprietary so if you wanted their software you had to buy their hardware.  That could only take them so far.  Look how successful their messaging software was as  soon as they ported it to ios.

When it comes to Microsoft they don’t seem to have cracked the nut on how to do mobile even if they have plenty of samples to follow.  Their intricate system of 3’rd party development paths for the Windows Phone platform is as bad as Apple’s, without having the advantage of being first with anything.   They should have looked at Google and Android instead if they wanted to see how to be  in opposition.    Google controlled the layout but gave away the OS, and  took control of the app store and the advertising where a lot of the money can be made.  They made it easy to subscribe and fast to submit apps. 

Even though I developed my first app for the Windows Phone, It took me a full month to be ok’d by the Windows app store.  A month I used to port it to Android, and it only took me a couple of days to be set up on Google’s store.  From I submit an app to Microsoft’s store it takes 3-4 days to be approved while it takes 3-4 hours on Google Play.  There is something wrong there.   Yes the Windows app is checked more for compatibility, but is it really necessary with such a limited number of hardware options.  In the end the customer download the apps and uses it if it works and complains if it doesn’t – or more likely throws it away.  That’s what you have trials for.

For and Android phone you have a lot more control over the features than for a Windows phone.  You can write apps that run as services, an essential for most movement logger apps, while this is restricted for a Windows phone “to save battery life”. 

Then it comes to cost, even though setting up in the 2 stores cost about the same, you’ll need a Windows 8 pc, a several hundred quid phone,  and most likely the more than 500 quid .net to develop for a Windows Phone.   Comparable to Apple where you need an Apple computer.  For Android you can do with any pc on any version of OS, a 50 quid phone and a 60 quid development tool.   The funny thing is I can write in VB for both Windows and Android, so it should have been easily portable between the two.  But the high start-up cost for the Windows Phone development tools combined with their limited volume, makes it a much higher risk. 

Microsoft could do so much to improve their app availability by a few cheap and simple steps.  Open the OS for more adjustments and buy up a couple of the largest Android development tool makers and adjust their products so apps already made on them can be easily ported to the Windows Phone platform.  That would really kick-start availability overnight.   

Howe is your power infrastructure laid out

It’s time to rethink the way we do power in our offices  and homes.  Time and time again we see how business and private homes is hit by flooding.  And what is the problem.  All electricity start at ground level or below.  Due to the unsigthliness of overhead power lines all such feeds are now buried under ground.  Then just inside there is a power meter and then the main fuseboard, And circuits spread out from there.   But with flooding this is a very vulnerable layout.  Even a foot of water can be an issue if these things are in a cellar, and electricity and water makes a lethal combination as the recent floods on the East Coast of the US proofs.  

In Ireland all houses have to have a water tank installed in the attic to ensure a certain water pressure, and for a certain amount of emergency supply if mains pressure fails.  Your power needs to be arranged in a similar manner.  The main lead needs to be brought fully insulated up to the top floor and the main breakers placed there.  Then each floor need a main switch so they can each be isolated.   That way you can still have safe power even if the ground floor is flooded.  Just switch off  that floor.   This panel needs to be in a place high up tough.  You can’t stand in a foot of water switching electricity.   For extra security you can also have automatic sensors that can switch off each floor as required.  Even better combine it with a complete environment monitoring solution.  The hardware for a solution that measures temperature and have sensors for power outages and flooding and notifies you remotely, can be bought from as little as a few hundred.

If you have a ups and or generator  it needs to be placed as high up as possible.  What about in or around the lift room.  Yes it will be a bit noisy but think off that as the positive feedback that its working.

One generator is seldom enough to ensure absolute uninterrupted power.  Because of its mechanical nature and unregular use it will be prone to not starting automatically when you need it the most.  Think of it as your nice weather sports/convertible car that always have a flat battery the day the sun shines.   A good and periodic generator testing regime will help, but If your office don’t have 24 hour onsite personnel that is trained in how to start it in an emergency, you will need a backup.  And with in an emergency I mean the maybe 10 minutes you have before your ups runs out of batteries. 

There is ways of connecting power to make 2 generators cross-feed the same grid, together or one or the other.  It’s complicated and your average electrician is not to eager about it, but it can be done even a reasonable cost.   

Very few companies goes this far unless they have experienced first-hand what a unscheduled power outage can do to today’s vulnerable systems.  Think of however that with more abnormal weather patterns any place could experience a flash flooding, and have you investigated every part of the way electricity take from its place of production to your building.  You wouldn’t want any of those transformers to go off with a bang leaving you in darkness for what could be days.  

What is a servers economical life

In some industries they see it as important that a computer hardware has a long lifespan.  I hear that in the oil industry they are looking to get 7 years out of their servers.  Is this realistic.  In my opinion no.  Anybody that expects the highest possible uptime should not expect more than 3years, at most 4years,  lifespan from a server, or other computer hardware with moving parts. 

There is a reason for that with most manufacturers the 3 year warranty is cheap, year 4 reasonable and the cost of year 5 can be accepted.  Any more than that and there is definitely no economy in it.  It’s cheaper to buy new.  The trouble is in most cases no1 the harddisks and no2 the power supplies.  No amount of guarantees can make them live longer.  All the guarantees do is ensure there is something there to swap them with when they do fail, and failure usually mean some sort of downtime. 

A problem is that no hardware manufacturer will give you a “guarantee to fix”.  Service contracts involve a guarantee to maximum time before engineer is on site, and often a second maximum time until part is on site.  In the old days these where one and the same since the service engineer had a ll the most common parts in the back of his car.  These days stock is smaller and the part might be a flight away.  Not good if your problems is during a volcanic ash crisis, or a 9/11.

I can see the attraction of 7 years if you are in the sample financial industry since there is requirements to keep financial data for 7 years.  It is however better to prepare a migration path early, because it will be needed. 

Another requirement when trying to extend the life of hardware is frequent monitoring.  And here I must insist on the necessity for physical presence in the computer room.  Those blinking lights will for the trained eye give early warning.  They are also much easier to see than a line of log hidden among thousands.  Today we see the opposite trend with many being proud of their dark data centres.  Dark here meaning no light due to no manpower on site.

The necessity to be prepared will increase as more and more backups are online or on secondary storage.  They will expire just as fast as other hardware.  In the old days tapes could last long if they where kept well and tested for failure at regular intervals.  Always keep 2 at least copies because tapes did have a high failure rate due to stretch.  To ensure recovery I always brought 3 sets to the dr centre.  One problem is to find something to restore them on when they are needed after several years. 

A diskdrive is a diskdrive and they will fail eventually due to that they have moving parts inside.   A possible solution can be the ssd that could be written to once and then , which would help against its so and so many writes sudden death syndrome.  Currently however due to its cost its not taken up in any large numbers. 

Ssd’s  is not a solution for the parts of servers/applications/databases that requires frequent rewrites.  It could even shorten the lifespan of the hardware requiring a higher rate of turnover.  There have in use for high turnover database logs been reports of whole shelves of ssd’s failing at once, after less than 2 years of service.

Forgotten about act of day to day IT operations

An important but easily forgotten part of a company is its day to day IT operations.  What create kudos is new stuff, like development.  This is where Executive management has its IT eye in a company whose core business is not IT.  This is a natural progress from that share value is seen to have all current  status built into its current pricing and only new announcements can afflict it in a positive way.

This often leads to the attitude that IT operations is just “your job” and achievements is treated thereafter.   Sometimes for a CIO the only way of getting cudos for the operations part is through saving money by outsourcing it.  No wonder 90% of their attention is on development.   

Problem is that today IT operations is at the core of every business.  Few can handle even the simplest task without their backend computers, networks and core infrastructure running perfectly.  When you outsource it you lose part of the control on a vital part of your business success.  It’s not until it goes wrong, and sometimes very wrong ref Ulster bank, that top management takes an interest.  This often leads to a negative aspect.  Every time IT gets attention it’s because something went wrong.  And since rewards are only given for positive news, day to day running of IT becomes a neglected non rewarding area.  And the most neglected part of all is often Disaster Recovery.  A part of IT that will always have a certain stigma over it, due to it’s need of negative thought.  An important key element non the less since its what prepares you for what every IT manager now is  inevitable;  a major system let’s call it hiccup.

    

It is sad that many non IT executives in businesses whose core activity is not IT related, almost takes pride of their lack of knowledge of IT.  They couldn’t express it so openly if it was about any other side of their business they lacked core knowledge.  

This leads to that the CIO/IT Directors role becomes a buffer between IT and the top executives.  And since it’s the top executives that hires said CIO they often end up with a “talker” rather than a doer  with real knowledge.  

Building downwards from there, the “talker” CIO will see too that he don’t hire anyone in lower ranks that can upstage him/her.  Alternatively will feel a need to ensure that anyone able to do such a thing has no channel of communication with the executive level.  Often an easy solution since the executive level has no interest anyway.

This is the type of scenario where massive problems eventually will bubble to the surface.  It also makes for an unhappy company with resentment growing through the lower ranks.

To avoid more pitfalls in the future the executive level  needs to get a better understanding for what makes their business tick on a day to day level.  Unless you have your core right, future success can not be assured, and even the new stuff will only give temporary success at best.   

The losers in the long run will be the shareholders. Long term the company that do not have control of their day to day operations, and IT operations is a vital part of this, will lose out, or fail spectacularly. 

Mass marketing via email

An effective way of marketing to an established set of customers has for a time been mass marketing via email.  You should always encourage your customers to include the email address when they register.  If you include clauses (with opt out buttons) that let you utilize 3’rd parties it will increase the value of your list.  Be careful though, you don’t want it to be a list of people that has banned you from sending to them.    

Genuine offers are required.  And they will feel extra good about it if they receive it before everybody else.  Like sending the email the night before the general release of the offer.

How to send to this list you have collated is a matter of choice.  If you are a regular mailer with knowledge of emailing I would recommend a self run packages due to its lower cost in the long run.  It also leaves you in control of the list.  A list that can have a value in its own.  If you contract out, be careful to have clauses in the contract that expressively say the list of email addresses is yours and yours alone, and is to be handed back if the contract ends.

A good one for self hosting is Listmanager form Lyris http://www.lyris.com  A very high capacity and fast mailer with response tracking facilities. Couple of hundred thousand an hour should be no problem.  It also handles spam filters very well. An important consideration for repeat mailing. You don't want all your efforts to be filtered away. A problem with free and cheap mailers. 
Lyris also has good support.  

Always send from a domain that can be looked up via reverse dns. This is the first test from most filters.  Also set up a real reply address where you can handle automated verification responses from spam filters, and answer spam complaints from the likes of gmail.  Be careful with having a opt out link at the end of all sent emails.

You need to carefully monitor your sending’s.  A good system should track the progress and put non successful conversations on hold.  However a general problem in the transfers can lead to a list where all is on-hold.  See to that they are not wiped off your list to quickly.  I would also recommend subscribe confirmations via email to verify genuine email addresses and sort out the mischievous.

Integrate your emails with your website so you can track the responses and uptake/sales from each mail.  A good package should have this included.

Creating a regular stream of similar emails can be a chore.  Some packages also offers automated help with the composing of the emails, allowing a daily marketing becoming somebody’s part-time job.  

The importance of selling your company name and logo

If you retail in the market for interchangeable consumer goods, it’s important to build up the customer knowledge of your brand.  You should take every opportunity to display your logo and just as important, your brand name.  It is easier to get shelf space in a chain of stores if their customers already request your product.  And the only way they can know it is by you marketing it to them.  This can take many forms.  Traditional advertising in papers, on tv or radio.  Or more modern forms like  website, Wikipedia, or social media like Twitter, Facebook or Google+  A combination is often required to reach momentum.

To get repeat custom they also need to know that it was your product they purchased.  That means displaying your brand name and logo very clearly on the product, and not be happy with a small mention in the nearly visible text on the pricing label.. 

It is surprising how many, that have worked a while in the same company, take it for granted that everybody knows about it.  The truth is that many times I where in contact with people from the UK who was asking Ryanair who, when I contacted them about something else than travel.  People might not associate the company if the query is unrelated to its most visible activity.  Also a company well known in a local area might be nearly unknown outside that area.  This can be an issue if your marketing people are local and you are trying to market nationally, or even globally.   

If you have a website, it’s important to visualise your product on it.  If they click the button products there should be pictures of what you can actually purchase, with proudly displayed logos and company name.  Try to find a way of selling your product on the web also.  There usually is some way of making a variant of the product that can have a longer lifespan so it can be shipped by cheapest way.  It will introduce them nicely to your product range and there will be no delay between seeing and purchasing.  Get good deals on shipping to as many destinations as possible and display them on your website.  You never know where the next purchaser might be from.  Selling online can be done very cheaply using established payment channels like paypal. and can take little effort to accomplish.  What is most important is that it gives you a way of better controlling the  presentation of the product.  On your site there is no big supermarket chain that sets a markup pricing you above your competitor, or give you inferior shelf space.

 If you insist on not selling directly, lead potential customers from your product page to outlets that will do your product.  And make sure regularly that they actually still do.  A customer will not like to travel to a store to get your product and then discover that they don’t stock it after all.

IT a cost or a source of income

Is IT a cost to be minimized or a, sometimes in a roundabout way, source of income to be maximised.  For a long time companies has seen IT as a cost centre, a necessity.  IT started out as a way of giving your business an advantage.  As your competitors got the same or similar systems iITbecame more of a necessity than advantage.  This has lead to the thinking of coomoditating IT.  Seeing IT as a service that can be bought from somebody else sample in the recent growth of cloud services.  A way of hardware makers to sell you hardware without actually giving you the stuff. 

The people in IT then will want to redefine themselves.  This together with the need for IT directors ad CIO’s trying to gain entrance to the very top management means that they will try to make more of a mark.  Why not by, instead of being a cost,  becoming a source of revenue. 

Early attempts lead to the invention of internal cost centres.  The problem her is the word cost.  Now other departments see IT as even more of a cost.  Something that can be bought internally or sourced externally.  It brought the cost of IT to people that before wasn’t used to paying directly for anything.  And with that a backlash. 

If we think about it, IT is already a source of revenue generation for many businesses.  The growth of the web has seen to that.  IT runs websites that in some companies all sales goes through.  However this is seldom attributed to IT.  Even though they often sourced the system, organized all the technical necessary, and created the site itself. They are just the facilitator, and out of the goodness of their heart, or as a lack of being present at the top where these things are discussed, IT has let the company continue to believe that.  

There is many other examples on where IT is revenue generating.  Take the customer helpdesk or call centre.  Sometimes originally an extension of the IT helpdesk it facilitates the continued sale of your products.   And at some companies at a cost of contacting.

 

What IT becomes in a company often depends on the person in the IT director role (+his/her team)  some times, but not necessary, combined with the interest the CEO has of the area.  If your IT management is inventive and has a good business acumen they see the potential in the new trends of the market in areas like social advertising, network building and customer interaction.  With the current development rate IT has not yet reached the stage where it cannot bring business advantage for the inventive that can redefine the market by their differentness.  To state anything else is to say the world has come to its pinnacle of development and there is nothing more to be done. 

For the rest maybe commoditation is the way forward.  There is certainly enough internal naysayers, and external forces, that sees profits to be made, for that to work too.  But then you have given away a potential avenue of making your offering different from everybody else.  If you sit down and wait, eventually a competitor will seize the advantage.

Social media a faux pas danger or advertising possibility

In the last years social media has become a way of “normal people to express themselves on the internet.  Before you had to use forums, where mostly other people set the order of the day.  Today you have a number of possibilities like blogs, twitter, facebook and now also google+

Modern websites needs to keep up with these new media by adding interaction to them like +1 and like buttons to allow you communicate directly with the people, = potential customers, that interact on these site.  

Many new and smaller businesses do take it up.  It is probably easier to organize if you don’t have to go through several layers of corporate bureaucrazy for a decision to use the media to be made.  It also takes somebody with an interest, yes nearly a passion for it, to keep up with the constant changes needed.  The modern web is about constantly changing content and interaction.  No longer is it enough with a single page with your product and contact details.  The more you interact the better your site will be responded to and the more potential customers will know about you.

More established companies are more afraid of what it can do to their current reputation than what potential it brings with it.  Some companies insist that no should be done by anyone that isn’t authorised, meaning the company spokesperson or the ceo him/herself. In the day of the social media that person just becomes 1 though.  So even with a powerful voice and a lot of resources behind them they will have problem reaching as wide as the whole companies thousands of employees could.

Instead of trying to stop this potential, one should look into better ways of spreading the word in a controlled fashion.  In a way it has been tried in the past where sample, companies would invite their employees to vote for them in award competitions.  And I don’t just mean “employer of the year”.

The company that don’t follow the customer risk being left behind.  For some years the way of advertising n the internet was with email campaigns or advertisements placed on webpages like  or internet search engines like Google.  Now even large companies consider stopping using emails, switching to other forms of communication.  There is speak of a move from search engines to social sites like Facebook, which could be one reason Google has shown interest with it’s + 

In the internet age we move fast and newcomers can quickly become the established for so to be overtaken again.  They who don’t follow can easily be left behind.  Ignore at your peril.

When did the full dump ever help

Most advanced systems will automatically do a dump of their memory, or challenge you to do a dump if they recognise a failure has happened.  Some os software vendors also love the dump. Problem is that if the system was able to recognize the cause of the crash, it wouldn’t have crashed in the first place, and a dump is usually just a snapshot of what is in memory at that exact time and tells little about the action prior to the problem. 

If a system was able to recognize a crash situation it means the vendor when building it knew this could happened and included a way of logging it.  If they had known it could happen they would have put in measures to prevent it in the first place.  Most crashes is due to unforeseen circumstances and can therefore not be logged.

A downside with dumps is that they usually become very large and take a long time to extract.  If you successfully extract them the tools to analyze them are either longwinded or difficult to interpret the results.  This means you usually have to upload them to a os or hw suppliers site.  And internet connections have increased a lot in size but the amount of data in these dumps mean you will be clogging a link for a long time.

 

After all that 99% of the time you will get back, nothing found.  I will advocate that it is a lot better to do targeted log extracts.  As an admin you will usually have an idea on where the problem lay.  Work with the developers or suppliers of the application your run for finding the best tool for logging what is going on.  Then play with the parameters of the logging tool at the same time as you put load on your system.  This may take some provocation, like artificially increasing the load or reducing the capacity of the system.  Easy if you have a multi computer system – turn off some of the resources.  But even on a single system you can sample limit the number of processors used or run up an additional load (can be from an additional dummy program). 

There can be many different causes to system crashes / malfunctions.  I have experienced amongst other missing non-public patches, bent processor pin, bad programming and the reaching of system limits.  These last can and have been in  os, db, app and hw.   What I haven’t experienced is that any of them has been diagnosed correctly and the solution found from a full system/memory dump.  

Danger of overcomplicating

Today there is many additionals to os and databases that will keep systems running or automatically fail them over if a problem is detected.  Well and good as long as everything run according to plan, which of course it never does

What of the undetectable problem.  There is no reason a well supplied and admin’d system should fail for a known issue.  (Unless that issue has been kept secret from the suppliers side).  If the issue is known it should have been patched.  But there are many possibilities for issues .  very few systems are exactly the same due to the manual ways of installing a system and the many permutations possible when it comes to server, storage, networking, os, database, application, adorns and  patching of them all.  This usually means that a change can at any time lead to an unexpected event.  The only way of taking fully height for this is to have another unchanged system, just in case.

Do not fall in the trap of creating more problems  than you guard against, resulting in more downtime rather than less. What these automatic additionals do is add complication.  More layers of things that can go wrong.  There is a lot to be said for the old manual failovers or restarts as long as there is a 24x7 human interface in place.  Yes they had a time delay in data replication, but this could be controlled by you the admin down to a, for the company, acceptable level. Most can live with that if it means higher security of the system = less dependency on the “no system available” manual routine.  And higher security regarding the maximum downtime.

Often the fastest resolution is a quick reboot or to fail over to a completely independent system running a bit behind the main system this can be caught in a non failed state.  If you make systems that can automatically failover you often have sample the databases running exactly in sync.  This can lead to that both db’s have the same error.  You can also have problems with the failover process  and a worst case scenario is that both systems ends up in a hung state.

Not that a manual secondary system is any guarantee.  It requires strict discipline by the admin to see to that it is fully updated to a runable state.  Regular testing will be required, and I would recommend regularly do planned switching between the live and the standby.  This to ensure that both are in a production capable state when you need them.

Automation and full synchronisation can give problems at time of upgrade or patching.  How do you patch in such a way that at least 1 full solution is available in a pre patched state.  And stays that way  until you know that the patch isn’t going to cause any issues.  What do you fall back to if you upgrade your live and your standby as one.  

Decision making and the art of management

You are a manager, take that decision and live with it. The advantage is that if you select door a over door b, nobody will know what would have happened if door b had been selected as long as you see your decision through to fruition. 

In all decision making there is a bit of “no risk no rice”.  You make your choices and take your chances.  But see to that you get a result.  Nobody can for sure know that the other choice would have been better as long as you make your choice do the job. Abandoned projects in the technology sector is a sign of lack of work at the preproject state, unless you are engaged in r&d.  There is a reason it’s called the bleeding edge.  There is no reason for why a company where IT is in support of the primary business rather than is their primary business should need to be on it. 

That said a successful new way of using IT in a business can give you a competitive edge, but the risk need to be managed and the potential cost upfront. 

If you want good admins enable them to make some decisions.  But always remember that you can delegate the decision but not the responsibility for it.  Train them in your way of thought so they know the direction you would have taken, and therefore is most likely to approve off. 

There is nothing wrong with, if there is time, a healthy discussion on alternatives.  Hearing somebody else’s view could increase your own knowledge and let you see possibilities you might not yet have thought of.  If you are sceptical, play devils advocate and magine up the worst possible scenarios to see if they have a solution for that to. 

The worst thing I see is management bringing in consultants to make the decision for them.  A popular way in government and the bureaucrazy.  If management can’t make decisions maybe the problem is just there.  It leads to lack of accountability, but accountability a very important part of management.  

Customer support an activa or a burden

Is there a point to ignoring customer support if it can be done for negligible additional cost.  Many companies sees customer support as a way of retaining previous customer so they come back for more.  Other sees it as a legal requirement that must be bared.  Some see it as a way of making their business stand out from the crowd.  Other sees it as nothing but a cost. 

Support can be done for little or no money.  A faq on your website is the easiest sample.  It takes little time to assemble a list of possible questions and answers about your product.  Other is more resource depending.  Like having somebody actually answering questions that customers communicate in, but it can be made profitable by making the customer pay extra for the privilege.  Sample support contracts, or a callcenter with a premium phone line.  Selling insurance can also be a way of taking payment for your support, or outsourcing to a 3’rd party.   A modern way in the internet age is to facilitate a live question and answer page where the answers are provided by 3’rd party agents who finance their time by leading you to additional paid for ads or services.    

Some forms of support can be seen as profit reducing.  In the shadier side of business a sample can be telling potential customers how to avoid the built in pitfalls in the purchasing process so they can reach the best bargains.  Here there is a fine line between naturally occurring issues with the purchasing process and deliberately engineering profit making problems.  Alternatively not prioritising fixing issues when they are discovered.  Luckily for your customer, if your business is very large there is 3’rd parties at hand, let’s call them agents or facilitators, that will help them overcome/bypass the issues, for a fee of course.  Thank’s to the help of the search engine many websites can also be found that will help a frustrated customer.  If you are a business owner you will have your work cut out finding them and let’s say ensuring that they are corrected.

Is no customer support a bad thing.  Not necessarily if you have a unique selling point that brings customers back to you regardless.  Sample if you are a monopolist, they who want your product has no choice and  have to buy from you if they want that product.  This is one of the reasons monopolies are frowned upon legally.  They take a lot of time an effort to police to avoid questionable profiteering.  

Importance of monitoring what you have outsourced

Your outsourced system is never as important for your supplier as it is for you.  Most contracts has check times counted in minutes, and by the time the set amount of alarm has been triggered, to avoid false positives and an operator has been alerted 15 minutes can easily have gone.  And 30 minutes or more before anybody takes it in hand.  Since you squeezed the price you pay for the service down to the absolute minimum the agreed penalty is seldom in relation to what the outage means financially to your organisation.

Another reason for doing your own monitoring is that it will give you the unmasked truth.  Do you trust your supplier to always tell you what’s going on.  Is their answers at times vague or slow forth coming.

The easiest way to see traffic is by network monitoring. A simple network graph from a tool like Utilwatch will give you second by second information, and can run on the cheapest oldest pc you have.  If it’s running in the background but within your field of vision you will immediately know if something is amiss.  Experience lets you interpret the data better.  You can also via simple scripts create easy traffic-lights.

Cheap second by second tools do however seldom store the data. They are wysiwyg.On screen current display only. You seldom need to store this much data though.  The interpretation is dependent of other factors at the time.  Like did you start/stop something.  Where your web caches reloading,  Was the blip due to a scheduled maintenance.  A simple screenshot will capture the moment for later inclusion in a manual log together with comments.  

There is also many tools that let you set up triggers and alarms to your own liking.  I would pick at least one that isn’t from the supplier of what you try to monitor.  If the supplier know how to monitor it / trigger the alarm they would/should have fixed the problem in the first place. 

Some like ipmonitor is also cross platform, and store the history of previous alarms if configured correctly.  If your urgency is lower in priority, and/or your problem is outside normal hours tools like Cacti will give you a view of last nights/weeks/months proceedings.

If you don’t feel like spending time or effort on monitoring yourself but still see the value of an outside eye on your hosting/network/resource provider there is many third party suppliers that will happily let you try before you buy their monitoring services.  But then you are back to the 15-30  minutes instead of seconds response again.

Encourage cross department suggestions/initiatives

In companies, due to naturally occurring internal competition, there is many barriers to cross department/field suggestions and initiatives.  Sometimes an outside view can be advantageous.  The view from somebody with some insight but don’t work with it normally.  Why go to an outside consultant when there is probably many within your own organisation that has ideas on the team but no way of exploring them.

 

Setup an internal discussion forum where ideas can flow across natural divisions.  In this day of the web there is no need of having a meeting about it where the ones that likes to hear their own voice rather than have something useful to say is most likely to rule the roost.  Sometimes its the quiet thinker that has the deepest thoughts. 

Filter and let somebody from the department, who’s responsibility the field is, to spend a little bit of time now and then to mull over the suggestions, and argue against them / state why they are impractical if needed.  It will help answer the question of why don’t we do thins this way or that way and drive the whole organisation towards the stated goal implying a great sense of understanding and inclusiveness. 

After all what is the cost of lending an ear to new ideas, except for a little time, and the gains could be significant.

This could be especially valuable in a customer facing organisation, or one that wants to be customer friendly.  The flow of info from the customer to your business do not always come through the planned channels in this area of online social networking.  Much can be gathered via sites like twitter, facebook and google+  Many companies “can’t afford” to monitor these sites, or they who do monitor are not in the right circles.  You have a whole workforce that use these media in their private time tough.  Utilize this resource.

This approach does require that the management of the company sees the employees as a resource and not just as a cost to be minimised.  There is many talented people out there that given the right opportunity could shine even if unexpectedly.   The first thought when finding an employee not thriving in their current position should be to  see if they could be a better fit somewhere else now when the organisation has learned their strengths (and weaknesses).

Switching an art in change

When will Cisco move on from the dark ages of command line and create a graphical interface that can handle all flavours of its hardware.  Or is the key to its “popularity” that it requires a specialist to handle it.  In such a way that every company of any size has one that de facto becomes the networking specialist and therefore has a say in what is purchased, upholding the status quo. 

Other platforms like 3com could be handled by any admin thanks to it realisation that we live in a windows world.  But the admin didn’t need to become a “networking specialist”, meaning didn’t need to do the dark art of programming from the command line.  And therefore was not seen as the networking guru.  It was a sad day and the beginning of the end, when 3com tried to make their interface more like  Cisco’s.  That is one thing HP should not follow up on after they bought the company.

Switching is into a revolution with the advance of blade servers.  Large companies would before merge all their standalone switches into large chassis creating a single unified unit for switching.  With the blade more of the single server connections is handled internally, and only the central part is done by a separate switch.  Here there is a task for the server vendors to have a separate but integrated choice of 10gb switches available.  And I am talking copper here.  Fiber is vulnerable to kinks  over short distances and dirt on the connections. = Best suited for longer distance communication.  Like building to building or campus to campus or longer.  For Within the room or within the floor there is nothing that beats the simplicity and the standardisation of the cats.  Though 10gb is not quite there yet when it comes to standards.  Special cables for each manufacturers equipment is not the way to go if you want your solution to spread wide.

When you do get 10gb in, you have the challenge of utilizing it.  And that include monitoring that you do reach the possible speed.  Now we are talking server to storage and racks of other media that would before have been depending on fiber for above 1gb connectivity.   Second by second monitoring is required and I can recommend Utilwatch.  You’ll be lucky if you see even 2gb/sec utilization so there is a lot to be gained for hw manufacturers in ramping up the performance of their equipment.  You can help by getting ssd disks, discussed in the article “SSD a step towards instant computing”

Since we mentioned copper versus fiber and iscsi.  Who let the fiber boys hijack the convention for iscsi node naming.  It would have been much more convenient if this was done to the ip standard rather than the complicated naming concotion of the fiber.  If copy and paste is not your friend, due to 2 separate systems with security between them, you are out with the pen&paper to transfer connection data from server to storage and vice versa.   

HW support in a time critical environment

Not long ago hw support on your critical servers meant that when you called the engineer out he arrived with a boot full of parts. This meant that when whatever part you thought faulty was changed.  And if it didn’t fix the problem he would try a number of other possibilities.  This equalled  the engineer was fast on site and then able to do the diagnostics and rectification in a single fast swoop.  How things have changed, and not for the better. 

The callout takes a lot longer to accomplish now.  First you might have to talk to the, outsourced to a third world callcentre.  If your company is English speaking and the support centre’s native language is not you’ll get by if at least one of the parties do have that as a primary language.  Problems start building when none of the 2 parties has the common language as their primary.

Next you will have to do a lot of diagnostics to pinpoint exactly the faulty part, because that is the only thing that will be sent to you.  And yes I did say sent because these days the part comes directly from an outsourced supplier and not with the engineer.   Meaning the engineer will want to ensure that the part is onsite before he/she.  Just so he/she won’t waste any time, as if that was better than to waste yours.  Expect to waste at 1-2 hours from part arrives to engineer arrives. 

If that part was not the only failed item, the process starts over, but this time hopefully helped by the engineer now onsite.  Unless he/she decides that the next part is unlikely to come inside his/her  duty hours and sneaks out the back door.

And remember in all this, the contracted max onsite response time often only starts ticking from when the problem has been diagnosed by phone and the part/engineer is being dispatched.  This often result in that a 4 hour onsite promise is a multi hr diagnostics per telephone and for diagnostics instructions and files to fly bback and forth, and then up to 4hours for the part/engineer to come to site.  

There is also a tendency for hw suppliers to see all means of transportation as having to function for their distribution.  So for rare or just very new types of systems this might mean the missing part has to be flown to the destination.  Don’t expect that to happen if another cloud of ash darkens the sky..  Or what if your hw is broken due to activity that has stopped air traffic, like 9/11.  

Is it not incredible that many hw suppliers has a problem identifying your specific setup every tiem you call them.  Even if that server is the only one you have from that specific manufacturer, you can be sure that every time you call them you have to give them serial numbers and partnumbers,  instead of they just looking up your company name and say “yes we can see it here on our system”.

Vendors need on their internal systems to come up with a  way of giving systems the customers  name for it.  This need to be part of after sales, a much neglected area.  For many hw vendors there is no such thing as “after sales”.  This is completely handled by support, and they are reactive, meaning they only kick in when a problem occurs and the customer contacts them.  Somewhere in between there needs to be something extra.  And outsourcing it to an agent do not work.  They only get paid for sales, and won’t be directly affected if support has issues.

Cooling in a damp climate

On the other hand you have the problem of cooling such a concentrated hotspot.  And air conditioning is not of the most stable devices.  Your indoor environment is sensitive to the smallest bit of sunlight and the outdoor units are very vulnerable all together. It ends up spending a lot of time de-icing so see to that your runoff is adequate.  Can be a problem when your fire extinguishing system needs a completely sealed room.  And your insurance, for it to be pressure tested.

A cool but humid climate is not always the best for a datacenter.  Yes you need to run your airconditioning slightly less but you get a lot more de-icing issues.  One of the reasons reverse cycle airconditioning for home heating never gained popularity in Ireland.  Compared to colder but much drier climates like Scandinavia.  If you have a weather station with a separate outdoor unit you will know what I mean.  They spend a lot of the time showing a humidity error because of very high values.  

Underfloor cooling was meant for network racks where the passage through the rack is unobstructed due to the shortness of the equipment.  Full length servers make blockages for the flow of the air through the rack so it’s better to give it cold air at the front and remove the hot air from the back of the rack.  This way you create cold hallways in front of racks and hot hallways behind racks.  If you have several rows of racks this do require that every second is turned the opposite way, avoiding that one servers hot exhaust becomes another’s cooling air intake.

A downside of hot and cold aisles is that where you are most likely to work, at the front where the console is, is also the place where there is a constant cold draft.  You could alternatively place the consoles at the back. It eases the cabling. These days it’s more normal to remote control the whole room so there is little need for direct human access.  And you could also increase the general temperature of the room slightly. Rather than set it at 19c you could experiment with 22c.

Few will run their cooling via the ups due to the large power demands and the resulting shortening of ups running period at time of grid failure.  If your computer room has generator backup, you will need to restart your cooling with the generator.  Lack of cooling will make your equipments internal fans increase in speed as room temperature goes up, eventually overloading fuses and cables. 

You can temporarily rectify the situation by pumping cold air in from the outside or redistributing the air already in the room better by a dedicated fan and an extendable tunnel, easily and cheaply bought from a hardware store like MachineMart.  

  

Due to the vulnerable nature of airconditioning you will need to overdimension.  You should have at least enough that 1/3 of the cooling capacity can be offline for maintenance and you are still able to keep the temeperature within range. 

It can sometimes be difficult to spot a failing airconditioning.  Simple filter or other error messages on the control panel is mostly self explaining, but sometimes you have a rise in temperature without any message.  Check the exhaust for that it’s actually cold.  Sometimes they keep on running but just blow out thes same air at the same temperature as it went in.  Specially if the outdoor part of the unit has failed.

I will again point out the importance of an environment monitor. They are relatively cheap for what they protect and the same one that monitors your power can also monitor the room temperature.  Place sensors in several different positions since it’s highly unlikely to be a uniform temperature in the whole room.  And single failures can result in hotspots.

Explosion in power needs

In the later years there has been an explosion in the power requirement per rack.  Not long ago you got 2*16amp sockets, for a and b side, and that was it. And it was like that for 10 years.  Then came the higher density of blades where 16 servers could now fit in a space before populated by 10 or sometimes jut 5.  On top of that each server would have more cores and each chassie would have to have psu’s to cater for it’s top spec  Pretty fast you are requiring more like 4*32amp per 10u and fuses where tripping all over the place.

Yes you can power manage by limiting the power each server and chassie can use, but then you can never run at your top capacity, so why did you buy it.  You will also have startup issues if you have total power failures.

For security against the frequent failures or just scheduled maintenance of the normal power grid most companies with in-house servers has some form of a ups system.  Here the problem is they seldom last for more than 10 or 20 minutes if you are lucky.  They will be based on batteries and batteries are not a good way of storing any significant amount of power when it comes to appliances that use large amounts at 220v. 

And what can you do in let’s say 15 minutes.  It’s hardly enough time for an admin to shut down the most essential databases.  (Oracle do not enjoy a sudden and complete loss of power).  Most will use best part of that time to trigger the alert.  Here an environment monitor like Avtech is worth its weight in gold for fast sms notification.

  

Most companies above a certain size will backup their ups with a generator.  And I do say “a” because very few beside dedicated data centres that offer services to third parties, has more than 1.  What they forget is a generator is more like a car.  How sure are you that your car will start first time after standing idle for a few weeks.  Regular testing is required but most generators stand around for many years, so now we are talking about a 20 year old car.  Yes it doesn't have much mileage, but that is not always a good thing.  Diesels like to be run.

If you try to solve this by a second generator you are in for a very complicated and vulnerable fail over system, to ensure that every part is redundant.  And somewhere in the middle there will be a some sort of a vulnerable failover switch.  Remember also you don’t want to make it so complicated that it induces more risk than what you where guarding against.

You could try to get a second grid supply but in most places you will find that an actual physical separation on the supply side is nearly impossible. Competition just hasn’t got that far.  You will also run into the same problem as for a second generator, how to feed power from 2 sources.

SSD a step towards instant computing

 Ever since I first started working on optimizing server performance I have felt that the ultimate goal is instant computing.  Where I define instant as no for the user conceivable delay from the user from request to result.  Unfortunately few suppliers has set such, for the outside observer, quite natural goals.  They are usually just happy with a bit faster than last year or a bit faster than the competitor.  So you will run into a load of configuration limits for system parameters that hasn’t kept up with the explosion in hw possibilities combined with the lowering of price/performance.

As soon as you overcome one bottleneck it’s on to the next one.  Part of this quest has been to get as much of the data into memory as possible to overcome the slowness of traditional spinning plate disks.   With the arrival off ssd’s I thought we could be close to this goal.  And for sample email searches in Outlook it’s close.  If you had a few thousand emails searches takes an age because it goes on in the cache your Windows pc stores locally.  If you use an ssd disk in your laptop/pc it’s down from minutes and sometimes hours to seconds.  The greatest leap ever, but so little appreciated that even Dell stopped (for a while) putting ssd’s as an option even on their high end pc’s.

The greatest gain for servers is obviously where there is a high frequency of ever changing data.  Like database logs.  Unfortunately also the one area where the recommendations are not to use them due to the ssd’s limitation of total rewrites.  There is work going on to automatically exclude areas that nears this limit.  Though not fast enough for some that reached it with total failure of whole disk shelves as a result.  This write limit should also be a thought for san manufacturers that automate on what type of disk the different types of data are stored depending on their frequency of access.  Maybe one should just take the penalty and routinely change out the disks every about 18 months.  An easy task with proper raiding.  And if you went with the cheaper server type or medium sized storage ssd’s instead of the super san = super expensive ones, still a cost effective way.

Aside from that log versus max total writes anomaly databases has much to be gained from ssd’s.  Specially they so large that they can’t be all sucked into ram or where there is a high frequency of updates and where one for security precautions prefer the synchronous write instead of asynchronous.   

Server internal ssd’s are actually an alternative for servers that before was optimised by utilizing the caching ram of an external storage unit.  This way saving considerably on your next system hw  upgrade.  

Backups, art that needs reinvention

Some of the articles you see about data lost in the cloud is beyond belief. There is no excuse for loosing data that was stored more than 24 hours before the problem happened.  Most storage users will have a few snapshots and a dr tested way of restoring them.  The problem comes when you go beyond the snapshot that is still on disk.  Backup of snapshots to other medium is still in its infancy.  The most prominent of backup solutions jsut don’t have it in them  And I have seen virtual server systems presented as complete solutions without a thought for how to get the data back if the thing burned down or, currently more likely, was drowned in a flood.  There is a job here for a specialist in deduping, with the added flavour of a couple of extra copies.

There is a tendency to not treat virtual servers as real servers.  Of course you can restore all the physical servers. But what about the virtual ones.  With dormant or little used virtual servers a lot of them can fit on a few physical hosts.  But the total data can still be the same as if each server was a separate physical.  If you haven’t backed it all up, you need to at a minimum have a definite restorable master and a record of all the steps taken to create each one.

We should not either forget the data people bring around with them. As laptops get ever more capable, most now more powerful than servers where 4 years ago. Developers like to have it all at hand.  A very important part of that time critical project might has its only copy on a thing thrown hither and dither every morning and evening.  Greatly encouraged by the cheap developer tools  licensing we see emerge as a teaser to get more people onboard.  And developers never where the first to think about what happens when things go wrong, or whether that online storage deal included a quantifiable and guaranteed backup/restore.

Often the issue is it takes a long time for a user to discover that their data is actually no longer there.  Today even the smallest of user can have thousands of files.  And since nobody longer learns about file system and folders they never see them except when they need them. It can take months or years if they are only used at the annual budget time or multi yearly planning stage. For that amount of data/iterations it is/was often uneconomical to store it all on disks.  Besides your auditor probably still loves the tape.  

We also have the fast pace of the technology. A much used refresh cycle is 3 to 4 years due to the rapid rise in hardware support costs after the initial contracted support period.  But the requirement is that financial data is to be stored for 7 years.   Ask your IT department if they can restore you a 7 year old backup.  Even if they have the tapes do they have the drives to restore them with or the system to restore them on to.  Not such a large problem if the software system is still in use and the data stored in a database.  They are easy to migrate with the hardware refresh as long as you haven’t segregated out to much of the old to fit the new.  Still you can always add some more modern storage to get those data back in, if you planned for that eventuality in the first place.

Relational databases – a quick look at flavours strengths and weaknesses

Let’s start with the master of them all Oracle.  It’s the db with all the tools, tweaks and it scales well.  And if the price was right this is the one most would or should pick, however it seldom is. Oracle never followed the development in the processor where each core get weaker but you get a lot more of them. Hence their penchant for charging per core and their customers liking of the HP Itanium processor.

 Oracle is so advanced that it’s more like an operating system in itself and you need to take your patching seriously.  Also be into your file system details. Play with the config files, there is a lot to be gained.  It’s a pity the 3 defaults of small medium and large is not more up to modern standards.  Proper bakcups are essential. 

Oracle do not like loss of any of it’s data.  And since a lot of performance can be gained from running it raw, a simple file system backup won’t do the job.  You need to learn about dumps like dd, and have it done in the correct order.  Exports is also very important. In addition to being a secondary way of doing backups, they can also give you a lot of hints on fragmentation and proper sizing.  Don’t either forget to have multiple control files in many separate locations.  

It’s the one db where you really can’t live without a support contract from the mothership.  And if you have a set of the printed manuals, they will be from a previous version but they are worth their weight in gold. And 95% of them is still applicable.  Read all about it’s system tables.  There is a lot to be gained here. For standardisation and easy admin to admin transfer have a look at the old OFA manual.

It’s nearest competitor as a multi os db is Sybase. Now owned by SAP. A brilliantly designed but more simplistic model. However you’ll have problems getting more than 1 installation (version) onto a single server. Instead it uses what they call userdatabases. Requires a strict discipline as an admin so you know which one you are in. But organizing the file storage and backups are a lot simpler

It’s penchant for “go” is not as good as Oracle’s execute command, and it’s method of dumping output to file is archaic. Like Oracle it’s very sensitive to playing with the kernel settings on unix/linux. Most of it’s performance is to be gained here. In addition to, like most relationals, a good scheduled reindexing.  A good set of Sybase’s own manuals will go a long way for your support needs.

Mssql could have done the knockout on the other db’s if it hadn’t such a scaling problem. It depends on a single server, and Windows on top of that, and can only scale upwards at the speed of the hardware development. Windows Datacenter is an option but due to its obscurity and odd Microsoft rules on deployment, Windows Enterprise is really your option. And then we are back to this processor thing again. It is a database that most admins can manage though, even without the scarce manuals.  They might not utilize all it’s potential but any Windows admin can make it run. Just give them a few hints or a small course on simple housekeeping like dumps and scheduled reindexing/reorg.

Mssql’s testing/analyzing tool is very good but it’s not as handy as Oracle’s command line “desc” for analyzing sigle sql queries.  However it does give you a nice way of presenting your findings.

Adabas owned by the German Softwareag is a story of what could have been. Popular among some German companies/developers it never reached the popularity of Sybase. If you have seen it its probably because you had a system from a German company that was based on it.  Very simple to manage, don’t even need a manual to start, stop and backup this one.  Low cost and flexible.  It’s ripe for a large multinational to take it over.  Somebody with a long reach, believe and financial muscle to push it into the limelight.

Mysql the developers  favourite due to their perception that it’s “free”.  Now owned by Oracle. There is no such thing as a “free lunch” however.  What you don’t pay for the software itself, you,  due to it’s popularity among specialists, will pay for in admins.  Recommend testing your restores frequently. Specially when it comes to getting back the last data entered.   Ripe for a organized set of admin tools. Oracle has a long way to go, and lots of opportunity for ad on profit making.

A problem with all relationals is that they are good for adding and picking/filtering small amounts of data and creating automation for repeated actions, but when you reach certain level of reads needed it’s better to forget about the indexing.  When that happens the old ways are better. The db’s  security against data loss also makes them vulnerable for slow down by locks and erroring by deadlocks. This is why if you have to read all the inputs/data it’s faster to use the file system directly for your (interim) storage, without the overhang.  Many large players do.

Prioritising when everybody is screaming

We have all been there, just one of those days when things go wrong. And sods law says they all come together.  Now you need to prioritise.  If you have done your preparations this should be easy in your head.  You have your list of systems in prioritised order as a result of their importance to the company and the immediacy of the effect of downtime.  Adjusted for top management priority and current interest. 

Let the admins get on with the job, see if they need additional outside help, and keep the top brass away.  Most fixes are based on the rolling halv hour.  It will take halve an hour to know if this will work before we discover the next issue, or try the next possibility.  Be ready to run parallel avenues or make sharp decisions.  If your systems are properly admin’d / backed up there is usually a fast way or a slow way to restore.  Problem is, when do you abandon the fast way and go with the more secure but slow.

Avoid falling in the trap of helping the biggest nuisance user first, or the directors darling.  The dangerous complainer is the one that says nothing to your face but complains without you knowing and without change of response.  And their argument will stand if their system should have had priority.   Many systems are important but they can take a certain amount of downtime. How many accountants do you see outside hours or in weekend outside of the budget and reporting cycles.  Use your urgency/dependency listing from the DR plan to help  you.  Think of when they normally schedule upgrades.  You will also thank yourself for not storing all the eggs in one basket or all the data on the same san.

Recruiting, hints for managers out hiring

First find out what you are looking for. If you are hiring for a manger are you sure you want the same as the last one. He/she might have worked out well but their field speciality is probably well covered for now. Maybe the next one should be slightly different. 

Time from announcement/advertisement to first interview should be as short as possible. Specially if you recruit for tech jobs where there are many companies looking for the same candidates. How many times has your company lost out on a candidate that is no longer available. How many has turned down an offer of interview. If the number is high you need to look at your process again.

If your plan is for more than 2 rounds of interview your recruiting is not as efficient as it could be and you are likely to lose out on the best candidates.  Did you weed out enough of the chaff by reading the cv’s thoroughly or are you wasting everyones time by just skimming them for the first time at the interview.  Large multinationals are big sinners in having many rounds of interviews. Is that a sign of too many corporate layers = bureaucrazy. Is there to many people involved in your decision process. However if you the manager ain’t technical, bring an expert from your team. It gives them the chance to meet their potential future colleague.

When doing the interview do you do the “take me through your cv thing”. That means you have to fit it to the job. An alternative approach could be “take me through samples of your experience for each of the requirements in our job description”.  This will give the candidate the opportunity to bring in more relevant stuff, and will let you see if they can translate their earlier experience to their new tasks.  

Do you use a technical test already at first interview. It will help you confirm your initial opinion, and you can have more experts evaluating it, covering a larger technical field.  There is nothing wrong with programming on paper. Many universities still use it for their exams. Personally I don’t see any problem with manuals, helping aids or mobile phones either. If they can get assistance at the test, they can get it in their work, and what you really want is somebody that can complete the job.  

There is nothing wrong testing for all the nice to haves also.  Remember one thing, if the candidate knew the answer to all the test questions, the test wasn’t hard enough.    

When you have done a few interviews you know the do’s and dont’s. Bring personnel in on the second round, reducing the times you have to wait for their availability. And they don’t really need to meet anyone that isn’t to be hired. One of the biggest delays can be organizing a time that suits everybody.  Therefore bring as few interviewers as possible, but always minimum 1 other for legal reasons.  And It gives you thinking time.. If you are not the final decision maker, think about if you yourself need to see the candidate more than 1 time and leave the final interview to the decision maker and personnel.  I would suggest just 2 for second rounds, just so there is a choice. And you don’t have to send forward anyone you can’t live with yourself.

If you are unsure of a candidate, or rather you think there could be a better candidate out there who’s cv you haven’t seen yet. If the potential candidate is free on the market at the moment, take a chance.  That’s what probation is for.  It’s takes less ruthlessness  to trial somebody currently out of work, than somebody that has to quit their current job.  And your deal with the recruitment agency should always include a step down ladder in fee if a candidate is later found not suitable.

Lastly, give a thought to all that was unsuccessful. It won’t cost you much to tell them, but it will mean a  lot to them to know.