See we are in the wrong business, we should sell servers to the government!

On 5/22/07, Bruce Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Hi all,
>
> Seems to me the system was obviously not correctly tested i.e. I'm sure
> that it was tested, but obviously the testing was not adequately
> designed/practised.
> If testing had been properly performed, design flaws would have shown up.
> Both of the above point to a lack of technical skills/project management
> - not necessarily java or DBA.  Could be network or a number of other
> things, couldn't it?
>
> Couple of things I did discover:
> - The eNATIS site was very excited when they handled 12 transactions per
> second.
> - On 18 April they had 1 DB Server.  That night they added second server.
> - Over the next few weeks they added a third, and then a fourth which was
> more powerful than the other 3 put together (makes you wonder what the first
> one was!)
>
> I might be missing something here, but the impression I have is that the
> flaws in the system are so fundamental, that the the system (which has been
> in development since 2001/2) cannot be "fixed".  It seems like a "complete
> re-write" is the solution....;-)...perhaps the CT-JUG could take it on as a
> little project ;-).
>
> My 2 cents,
> Bruce
> PS: shortly before this topic began in this forum, I had been reading
> about eNatis and came across this blog which I found quite entertaining:
> http://dotnet.org.za/codingsanity/archive/2007/04/23/enatis-performance.aspx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *On Behalf Of *McFinnigan
> *Sent:* 22 May 2007 09:54
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [CTJUG Forum] Re: eNatis-Anybody know the technology behind it?
>
> It strikes me that the two most likely scenarios for this clusterfrack are
>
> 1) Poor database design and a critical lack of DBA skills
> 2) Poor understanding of the needs of a high transaction volume system.
>
> I'm mentally ranking them in order [2, 1], myself.
>
> The fact that they're going on about needing more server capacity makes me
> believe they've got a very inefficient design in place.
>
> J
>
>
>
>
> >
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are
> addressed.  If you have received this e-mail in error please notify NSFAS
> immediately.  Please note that any views or opinions presented in this
> e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
> of the organisation.
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007
> 14:01
>
>


-- 
Alwyn Schoeman

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CTJUG Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/CTJUG-Forum
For the ctjug home page see http://www.ctjug.org.za
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to