Re: IDS10 stability VS IDS11 features (aka "for IBM")
Davorin Kremenjas wrote: > Right, > > probably a very lame try to imitate Gumby, but I'll give it a try :) > > I'd like to hear you opinions on this topic, here is mine. > > IDS11.50 is around for a good deal time now, _loads_ of new features. > I can see a lot of them making my DBA life easier so I'm looking to > upgrade reasonably soon. > > On the other hand, running IDS 10.FC8(ish) very stable in production > with all HDR/ER goodies I'm a happy man. Also, I'm doing regular > upgrades every time a new patch comes out (looking to roll out > IDS10.FC9W2 in the next few weeks on all prod instances). But, every > time I read the release notes/bug fix lists they scare the s**t out of > me. Too many crashes for my taste for (at least seemingly, R&D please > don't get offended now) trivial reasons (update stats or whatever). > > This makes me conclude the next: IDS10 support is ending in less than > 2 years (30 Sep 2010 according to IBM website) wouldn't it be nice to > "freeze" IDS10 code and work ONLY on bug fixes? Whoever wants to trade- > off features for stability, great, here's 11.50, just upgrade. For the > rest of us, we'd like to sleep well :) And in two years time, I'm sure > v11.50 will be just as stable as v10 is now, we'll have vNext too, so > the whole story can be repeated. > > Does this make any sense to the rest of you? Or am I just being too > naive? (Now I know at least the Clown will answer :o)) > > Cheers > > Davorin That *is* the premise, IDS 10 releases should *only* have bug fixes in and no new *features* to de-stabilise the product. Currently ALL customer defects will probably get fixed in 10, whether hit by 1 customer or 100, so it is misleading to just read the Bug Fix list - imagine reading the Boeing 737 "Outstanding Fixes" document just before getting on a Boeing 737 (like the Cooling System failover cable is in the same loom as the primary cable - THAT is against failover basics, and can cause the cabin not to be pressurized causing hypoxia "the creeping death" within 15 minutes). The point being that out of 10,000 flights, one MAY have an issue (obviously the one I am going to get on). Anyways, as long as you do LOADS of testing, and report ALL issues that concern you (preferably with a reproducible test case) then you will be fine :o)
> From: theBP@Usenet-News.Net > Subject: Re: IDS10 stability VS IDS11 features (aka "for IBM") > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:13:30 +0000 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > That *is* the premise, IDS 10 releases should *only* have bug fixes in and no new *features* to de-stabilise the product. > > Currently ALL customer defects will probably get fixed in 10, whether hit by 1 customer or 100, so it is misleading to just read the > Bug Fix list - imagine reading the Boeing 737 "Outstanding Fixes" document just before getting on a Boeing 737 (like the Cooling > System failover cable is in the same loom as the primary cable - THAT is against failover basics, and can cause the cabin not to be > pressurized causing hypoxia "the creeping death" within 15 minutes). The point being that out of 10,000 flights, one MAY have an > issue (obviously the one I am going to get on). Uhm no. Not exactly. Its not feasible nor cost effective to try and fix "all" of the known bugs/defects/undocumented features in a legacy release. (10.x is a legacy release when in context of 11.5x available) IBM SWG IM IDS product management team has to prioritize the fix list. It may be that the defect only affects a limited number of customers and the defect may not exist in the next version. (Meaning it exists in 10 but addressed in 11). So it may be more efficient to recommend a customer to move to 11 than to stay on 10. I believe that the shock issue is that when a defect is found, yet not addressed by the patch, you see the warning in the release notes. (This is an assumption on my part, so I could be way off base.) The reality is that you shouldn't panic if you haven't experienced the problem... yet... Also note that defects may not be fixed in a maintenance release if there's a viable work around. Again this is at the discression of the IDS development team. (They are there to make money after all. ;-) The reality is that IDS has one of the highest customer sat scores as a software product and is probably the most stable platform on the market. (World class HDR? :-) Note: Gumby tends to gripe about marketing/sales of the database because it is so good. (Even Janet Perna couldn't kill it.) I also tend to gripe about the lack of features/functionality that would put IDS out ahead of the competition. Not to pick on Ambush, et al, but to bring focus on issues where a simple management decision can go a long way... -G _________________________________________________________________ You live life online. So we put Windows on the web. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/127032869/direct/01/
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > > From: theBP@Usenet-News.Net > > Subject: Re: IDS10 stability VS IDS11 features (aka "for IBM") > > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:13:30 +0000 > > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > > That *is* the premise, IDS 10 releases should *only* have bug fixes > in and no new *features* to de-stabilise the product. > > > > Currently ALL customer defects will probably get fixed in 10, whether > hit by 1 customer or 100, so it is misleading to just read the > > Bug Fix list - imagine reading the Boeing 737 "Outstanding Fixes" > document just before getting on a Boeing 737 (like the Cooling > > System failover cable is in the same loom as the primary cable - THAT > is against failover basics, and can cause the cabin not to be > > pressurized causing hypoxia "the creeping death" within 15 minutes). > The point being that out of 10,000 flights, one MAY have an > > issue (obviously the one I am going to get on). > > Uhm no. Not exactly. > Its not feasible nor cost effective to try and fix "all" of the known > bugs/defects/undocumented features in a legacy release. > (10.x is a legacy release when in context of 11.5x available) > > IBM SWG IM IDS product management team has to prioritize the fix list. > It may be that the defect only affects a limited number of customers and > the defect may not exist in the next version. (Meaning it exists in 10 > but addressed in 11). So it may be more efficient to recommend a > customer to move to 11 than to stay on 10. > > I believe that the shock issue is that when a defect is found, yet not > addressed by the patch, you see the warning in the release notes. (This > is an assumption on my part, so I could be way off base.) The reality is > that you shouldn't panic if you haven't experienced the problem... yet... > > Also note that defects may not be fixed in a maintenance release if > there's a viable work around. Again this is at the discression of the > IDS development team. (They are there to make money after all. ;-) > > > The reality is that IDS has one of the highest customer sat scores as a > software product and is probably the most stable platform on the market. > (World class HDR? :-) > > Note: Gumby tends to gripe about marketing/sales of the database because > it is so good. (Even Janet Perna couldn't kill it.) I also tend to gripe > about the lack of features/functionality that would put IDS out ahead of > the competition. Not to pick on Ambush, et al, but to bring focus on > issues where a simple management decision can go a long way... > > -G > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > You live life online. So we put Windows on the web. Learn more about > Windows Live <http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/127032869/direct/01/>; F*ck me, that is what I thought I said.
> From: theBP@Usenet-News.Net > Subject: Re: IDS10 stability VS IDS11 features (aka "for IBM") > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:51:11 +0000 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > [SNIP] > > F*ck me, that is what I thought I said. > _______________________________________________ Err yeah, you said "probably fixed" and I read it as you saying that it will get fixed. The problem is that some people get the silly idea that if they report a bug then IBM has to fix it. I realize it is not a major issue, just that this minor issue could be at the bottom of a lot of customer sat issues. What makes this issue more confusing is if a defect is reported to IBM, IBM knows the problem and its already fixed in the next release, yet you're running an application on an older release because the company that wrote the app hasn't certified the app to run on the newer release. So IBM doesn't want to spend money doing a patch, yet you're in a Catch-22 because if you don't get the patch, you are in deep do do because you can't go to the next release. (Hmmm SAP? 8-() :-P These are the types of issues where the customer becomes irate and irrational. This is why the SSSS for IM get custom made Nomex underwear to protect their family jewels. ;-) (SSSS = Senior Services Sales Specialists which translates to the older Informix BDM title) The client team pawns the customer sat issue to the (local) rep who then has to work with the support staff and try to calm the customer down. (shudder) Oh the horror memories we had to face when DB2 V8 was released. Or when Janet talked customers from XPS to DB2 ... (Sorry for the flashbacks) But hey! What do I know? Its not like I ever had to sit in front of senior execs at a client site and take their wrath full bore. Oh wait, I did. Darn, now I have to go back in to therapy to repress those horrible memories. Oh and a word of advice. If you're going to work in IBM sales, work for S&D and don't be cross matrixed in. ;-) -G _________________________________________________________________ Send e-mail anywhere. No map, no compass. http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_anywhere_122008