Timeline for I'm tired of answering questions with: "Upgrade the firmware" or "Run updates"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 3, 2014 at 14:00 | comment | added | vn. | At first, it could help if the software/firmware didn't have bugs that need to be patched ;) tests, tests, tests... | |
| Apr 3, 2014 at 12:38 | comment | added | rleir | As you say, upgrading might be a practical problem. We need to be sensitive to the possibility that the upgrade can cause unrelated problems. People administering complex systems in production use do not upgrade unless the fixed problem is more important than the risk of breaking some other function. And they might want to do a minimal upgrade, so it is helpful to know which version fixes the problem. | |
| Mar 27, 2014 at 5:08 | comment | added | Slartibartfast | I blame the vendors for failing to maintain useful communication with their customers. If your product has random crashes in a critical component and all of your customers don't know about it and how to fix it, you failed them. Also, failing to be as up-front and complete as possible about side effects to updates so that people don't avoid updates just because the last two updates they did (three years ago) caused days of outages. That's assuming that all updates are being tested better than they are today. | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 20:25 | comment | added | ewwhite | @MDMarra But it's for the love of the game, er... rep-points! | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 16:06 | comment | added | MDMarra |
@ewwhite Good point. I just fear that I'm a broken-record by repeating the same thing - Welcome to why my SF participation has been drastically reduced in the last 6 months or so. You can only lead so many horses to water before you want to turn them all into glue. The higher SF climbs up the google visibility ladder, the lower the quality of the community, unfortunately. It's why I've replaced my serverfault.com bookmark with chat.serverfault.com
|
|
| Mar 26, 2014 at 15:40 | comment | added | ewwhite | @MikeyB Then that's a troubleshooting exercise. Determine what's different with the particular host. I've seem mismatched firmware across similar hardware platforms cause issues with specific nodes. | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 15:34 | comment | added | MikeyB | "But we have 500 machines all running the same firmware, why does only this one have trouble?" | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 0:23 | comment | added | Tim | "It's been running for six years, why would it break now?" | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 5:06 | comment | added | HopelessN00b |
@ChrisS What surprises me isn't that people ignore regular server maintenance (hell, we do that because we're very understaffed), it's that when something breaks the first thought isn't maybe I could try updating that firmware/driver it's been running for 6 years...
|
|
| Mar 23, 2014 at 2:10 | comment | added | Chris S Mod | @ewwhite You're surprised that people ignore regular maintenance until the server breaks? I though you'd been around IT for a few years... | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 1:50 | vote | accept | ewwhite | ||
| Mar 22, 2014 at 0:24 | comment | added | ewwhite | Good point. I just fear that I'm a broken-record by repeating the same thing... Granted, I do try to link the bugfix or release note that applies to the problem. But The frequency with which this occurs on VMware and HP-related items is surprising to me. | |
| Mar 22, 2014 at 0:20 | history | answered | Joel Spolsky | CC BY-SA 3.0 |