On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Brandon Allbery <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:11, Danielle <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> he would schedule the maintenance with the >> customer for what was then yet his on-call week but keep it quiet from >> the rest of the department until someone had accepted the swap.
> Over and above the oncall issue, that sounds problematic. I'd expect anyone > scheduling maintenance to report to the department immediately so it's on > the calendar in case something else comes up; failure to do so should be > punished on general principles. What Brandon said. Troubleshooting a service being down when it's an "expected" outage isn't fun... FWIW, we schedule maintanence irrespective of who's on call. Generally, whoever brings forth the work does the outage. We may ask the on-call person to do it, but unless the boss wants him to, he can always decline. In cases where more than one person is required, we solicit volunteers. But we're a small shop and we've got people who have a strong work ethic. We also try to design systems such that off-hours outages aren't necessary. Perhaps for Danielle's group, decoupling on-call and off-hours maintanence would be a good idea? -- HTH, YMMV, HANW :) Jason The path to enlightenment is /usr/bin/enlightenment. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
