Tuesday, June 27, 2006


When a two-year-old asks if the ocean's wet because it's full of water, you can't help but smile. The kid's starting to get a grip on logic (or on winding people up). Almost as amusing is the failed logic of that same child refusing to eat a peach because his best friend ate a peach the week before and fell down afterwards, cutting himself badly.

It's not so amusing when adults do this, and even less so when they're supposed to be professionals. It must be a Full Sun -- these are all tickets which came in since last night:

We running $YourBigApp version X. We noticed since Friday on production system some attachments attach and some won't. Only some small attachments can write, then none.

The attachments directory \\machine\directory was filled up Friday. We delete files not need and now 16G's of free space is available. Not sure if the full disk cause files issues.
You're not sure if a full disk caused file save failures? Are you equally unsure that the pen's out of ink when it only scratches the paper rather than leaving marks or could another possibility be that the Moon is in Virgo and the temporal plane is affected in just such a way as to prevent you writing at that spot which happens to be exactly 3 arc-seconds from a major ley line crossing?

We want to apply all of the language packs except for CHS and CHT. Up until this point, we've only applied the language packs in environments running a Unicode database. We want to know if there are any known issues with applying the language packs to an environment that is currently running non-unicode (1252 code page).
Well Hoss, how are you going to cram a couple hundred thousand Unicode characters into space that only holds 256? WinZip?

We are seeing low performance on $LocalClient workstations with 512MB of system memory. Although this is the minimum amount required it still means that if users have other applications open available memory will soon be not enough. Can you test and confirm that 512MB is the minimum amount really necessary?

In your documentation it says we could expect up to 70% performance improvement with increases in CPU speed and memory. Shouldn't you list higher specs as the minimum since the program runs faster then?

I need a minimum of five cups of coffay a day to work. Give me eight and I'll work a lot better. Give me 12-15 and I'm on a ticket rampage. But I need at least five. Is minimum such a difficult concept?

We need to add a minimum intellect restriction -- a Punch the Monkey banner could probably weed out half of them.

x-posted to HuSi


Post a Comment

<< Home

In compliance with $MegaCorp's general policies as well as my desire to
continue living under a roof and not the sky or a bus shelter, I add this:

The views expressed on this blog are my own and
do not necessarily reflect the views of $MegaCorp, even if every
single one of my cow-orkers who has discovered this blog agrees with me
and would also like to see the implementation of Root Cause: 17-Fuckwit.