On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:34:10 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 20/10/2021 10:21, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>> Yes, it does seem a bit like a fire drill that consists of actually
>> setting the building on fire. That wouldn't be popular either.
>
>But it is the only valid way to test a UPS.
>
>A system we looked after had a big problem after a UPS failed to take
>the load. It had been test frequently but never by putting onto full load.

What about a dummy load, or if it's computers, a full normal load when
nobody's actually working? If it has to be done during the day, you
could timetable a half hour when everyone should save their work but
leave their computers running.

Rod.

On 20/10/2021 12:34, MB wrote:
> On 20/10/2021 10:21, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>> Yes, it does seem a bit like a fire drill that consists of actually
>> setting the building on fire. That wouldn't be popular either.
>
> But it is the only valid way to test a UPS.
>
> A system we looked after had a big problem after a UPS failed to take
> the load. It had been test frequently but never by putting onto full load.
>
I vaguely remember in the days pre the BBC's CC&M and all the Coding &
Mux was in the English Regions the UPSs were of the type that ran
continuously so pulling out the mains lead did nowt!

On 20/10/2021 12:59, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:34:10 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> On 20/10/2021 10:21, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>>> Yes, it does seem a bit like a fire drill that consists of actually
>>> setting the building on fire. That wouldn't be popular either.
>> But it is the only valid way to test a UPS.
>>
>> A system we looked after had a big problem after a UPS failed to take
>> the load. It had been test frequently but never by putting onto full load.
> What about a dummy load, or if it's computers, a full normal load when
> nobody's actually working? If it has to be done during the day, you
> could timetable a half hour when everyone should save their work but
> leave their computers running.
>
>
In my experience, one factor not always detected is UPS batteries
degrade over time, and when finally used in anger the system runs out of
juice after about 40 seconds !
Fine for 'brown-outs', but not much use for a sustained power cut

On 20/10/2021 10:21, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:21:00 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>>
>> [snip story]
>>
>> I am not popular for a while, but, on the plus side, none of us in any
>> office are ever asked to repeat such a damn-fool test again!
>
> Yes, it does seem a bit like a fire drill that consists of actually
> setting the building on fire. That wouldn't be popular either.

LOL! That's that's a very good, and funny, analogy!

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 20/10/2021 08:44, Mark Carver wrote:
> It seems (apart from possibly Mr Tweed ?) everyone in this thread must
> have retired years ago, they seem blissfully unaware of the present
> difficulties in the big bad 'new normal' world ?

I've accepted fully that I am out of date. I read the CCTV/sat/aerial
installer groups and I can't understand a word. And I'm glad.

Bill

"MB" <MB@nospam.net> wrote in message news:skoupl$53t$2@dont-email.me...
> On 20/10/2021 10:21, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>> Yes, it does seem a bit like a fire drill that consists of actually
>> setting the building on fire. That wouldn't be popular either.
>
> But it is the only valid way to test a UPS.
>
> A system we looked after had a big problem after a UPS failed to take the
> load. It had been test frequently but never by putting onto full load.

True, but you time the UPS test to take place when it will have minimum
impact to the business or the customers. At least as a first resort, to
eliminate gross problems like "the UPS will not even switch over because the
battery is totally flat". Assuming you've eliminated silly faults like that,
you go for the full-load test, when you are reasonably confident that the
UPS will do its job. And you have contingency plans so you can be up and
running again if the unthinkable does happen, even if the UPS does take down
the server.

"Java Jive" <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:skp7d2$28o$1@dont-email.me...
> On 20/10/2021 10:21, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:21:00 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>>>
>>> [snip story]
>>>
>>> I am not popular for a while, but, on the plus side, none of us in any
>>> office are ever asked to repeat such a damn-fool test again!
>>
>> Yes, it does seem a bit like a fire drill that consists of actually
>> setting the building on fire. That wouldn't be popular either.
>
> LOL! That's that's a very good, and funny, analogy!

I heard of one company which set off the fire alarm which caused everyone to
be evacuated from the building into one part of the car park... where the
managing director was waiting to announce a mass redundancy programme and
wanted a way of getting people all into the same place, and where they could
not sabotage equipment out of spite if they were "chosen for redundancy".
The MD got one hell of a bollocking from the fire brigade when they turned
up and found it was a planned false alarm - it went to court and I think he
was convicted of a health and safety offence.

On 20/10/2021 15:19, williamwright wrote:
> On 20/10/2021 08:44, Mark Carver wrote:
>> It seems (apart from possibly Mr Tweed ?) everyone in this thread
>> must have retired years ago, they seem blissfully unaware of the
>> present difficulties in the big bad 'new normal' world ?
>
> I've accepted fully that I am out of date. I read the CCTV/sat/aerial
> installer groups and I can't understand a word. And I'm glad.
>
I wonder if it's part of the natural human condition,  that after 40
years you've witnessed enough change and general nonsense within your
career, and suddenly enough's enough ?

(I'm at the 38 year point at present )

On 20/10/2021 06:57, Tweed wrote:
> Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:
>> On 19/10/2021 11:09, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> Well, they (possibly) didn't,  so we are where we are. I don't see how
>>> Brian constantly starting a new thread every few days and banging on
>>> about  it is going to help.
>>>
>>> Replacement equipment needs to be sourced, run up (by specialist
>>> engineering staff) and commissioned. In the real live world at present
>>> there are multiple supply and logistics problems, and ever extending
>>> lead times, (none of this is restricted to broadcasting either)
>>
>> What amazing weird and wonderful equipment takes this long to repair or
>> replace? Most of the news stories just say "servers" were damaged.
>>
>
> Any sort of IT equipment is in short supply at the moment.
>

Then, if they are just servers, rent and use cloud servers for now.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

On 20/10/2021 10:10, Tweed wrote:

> And for all those that say DR kit should be regularly exercised - who is to
> say it was not? In my experience things tend to work until they don’t. Just
> because the subtitle playout gizmo worked last month doesn’t mean it will
> work the next time you turn it on. I’ve lost count of the number of people
> stood before me with a bit of dead kit who protest that it was working fine
> yesterday.
>

It's always been a joke hasn't it?

Customer (full of indignation and doubt): "It was working yesterday!"
Me: Yes will that was before it was broken.

Also:
Customer (full of indignation and doubt): "I've had it for years and
years and it's never gone wrong before!"
Me: You've answered your own question.

Bill

On 20/10/2021 13:11, Mark Carver wrote:
> In my experience, one factor not always detected is UPS batteries
> degrade over time, and when finally used in anger the system runs out of
> juice after about 40 seconds !
> Fine for 'brown-outs', but not much use for a sustained power cut

Yes, I've experienced that more than once. Same with burglar alarm
batteries.

Bill

williamwright wrote:

> Mark Carver wrote:
>
>> In my experience, one factor not always detected is UPS batteries degrade over
>> time, and when finally used in anger the system runs out of juice after about
>> 40 seconds !
>> Fine for 'brown-outs', but not much use for a sustained power cut
>
> Yes, I've experienced that more than once. Same with burglar alarm batteries.

Everyone round here with a burglar alarm seem to think it's "normal" that the
external sounders all go off together whenever there's a power cut, and don't
realise it means they should have changed the battery in the panel ages ago.

Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 20/10/2021 15:19, williamwright wrote:
>> On 20/10/2021 08:44, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> It seems (apart from possibly Mr Tweed ?) everyone in this thread
>>> must have retired years ago, they seem blissfully unaware of the
>>> present difficulties in the big bad 'new normal' world ?
>>
>> I've accepted fully that I am out of date. I read the CCTV/sat/aerial
>> installer groups and I can't understand a word. And I'm glad.
>>
> I wonder if it's part of the natural human condition,  that after 40
> years you've witnessed enough change and general nonsense within your
> career, and suddenly enough's enough ?
>
> (I'm at the 38 year point at present )
>

Funny you should say that……

I’m similarly at the point of transitioning from thinking all my work is
really quite interesting to feeling I can’t be bothered with it anymore.

Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:
> On 20/10/2021 06:57, Tweed wrote:
>> Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 19/10/2021 11:09, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>> Well, they (possibly) didn't,  so we are where we are. I don't see how
>>>> Brian constantly starting a new thread every few days and banging on
>>>> about  it is going to help.
>>>>
>>>> Replacement equipment needs to be sourced, run up (by specialist
>>>> engineering staff) and commissioned. In the real live world at present
>>>> there are multiple supply and logistics problems, and ever extending
>>>> lead times, (none of this is restricted to broadcasting either)
>>>
>>> What amazing weird and wonderful equipment takes this long to repair or
>>> replace? Most of the news stories just say "servers" were damaged.
>>>
>>
>> Any sort of IT equipment is in short supply at the moment.
>>
>
> Then, if they are just servers, rent and use cloud servers for now.
>

I don’t think you quite appreciate the data volumes and speeds required….

Tweed wrote:

> I’m similarly at the point of transitioning from thinking all my work is
> really quite interesting to feeling I can’t be bothered with it anymore.

Ditto really, moving from physical servers to virtual servers and SANs and
better networking, rinse repeat make it better ... interesting ... exporting it
all to somebody else's datacentre in a random part of the world ... not so
interesting.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Tweed wrote:
>
>> I’m similarly at the point of transitioning from thinking all my work is
>> really quite interesting to feeling I can’t be bothered with it anymore.
>
> Ditto really, moving from physical servers to virtual servers and SANs and
> better networking, rinse repeat make it better ... interesting ... exporting it
> all to somebody else's datacentre in a random part of the world ... not so
> interesting.
>
>

Do we need to start uk.tech.cannot-be-bothered ?

On 20/10/2021 13:11, Mark Carver wrote:
> In my experience, one factor not always detected is UPS batteries
> degrade over time, and when finally used in anger the system runs out of
> juice after about 40 seconds !
> Fine for 'brown-outs', but not much use for a sustained power cut

Like all batteries often checked when still float charging and seem OK
until the charging stops and voltage drops down to nothing.

Years ago BT had a major fault (Worcester?) caused by a single small
wire being broken or missing in the battery room.

The UPS problem that we were involved in ended with all sites being
checked and most needed changing. The problem was that some of the
sites were on hilltops with no access for normal vehicles.

On 20/10/2021 15:14, NY wrote:
> True, but you time the UPS test to take place when it will have minimum
> impact to the business or the customers.

You have to have confidence that the system can withstand the UPS taking
the load. You can do a test in the middle of the night but you must
test also under normal running conditions, better to find out that it
does not during working hours than in the middle of the night when no
one on site.

On 20/10/2021 16:16, Tweed wrote:
> I don’t think you quite appreciate the data volumes and speeds required….

A friend has access to a Petabyte (?) / Second connection to a cloud of
some sort. He backed up all his own image files to it extremely quickly!

On 19/10/2021 20:33, charles wrote:
> In article <skn48m$rkd$1@dont-email.me>,
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 19/10/2021 17:44, Max Demian wrote:
>>> A proper "disaster recovery backup" should provide the same service as
>>> before. Not sans subtitles and AD. I don't think one that only provided
>>> SD (or monochrome) would have been regarded as "fit for purpose".
>
>> If their licence specifies subtitles and AD then I am sure OFCOM will be
>> giving them some penalties when it is all fixed. Will hopefullhy get
>> quite expensive for Channel 4.
>
>
> but, they need that money - to re-build
>
After they found £15m to outbid the beeb with Great British Bake Off,
and what have they recently forked out a lot for?!

On 20/10/2021 16:31, Tweed wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Tweed wrote:
>>
>>> I’m similarly at the point of transitioning from thinking all my work is
>>> really quite interesting to feeling I can’t be bothered with it anymore.
>> Ditto really, moving from physical servers to virtual servers and SANs and
>> better networking, rinse repeat make it better ... interesting ... exporting it
>> all to somebody else's datacentre in a random part of the world ... not so
>> interesting.
>>
>>
> Do we need to start uk.tech.cannot-be-bothered ?
>
It's a deal !  :-)

Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 20/10/2021 16:31, Tweed wrote:
>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>> Tweed wrote:
>>>
>>>> I’m similarly at the point of transitioning from thinking all my work is
>>>> really quite interesting to feeling I can’t be bothered with it anymore.
>>> Ditto really, moving from physical servers to virtual servers and SANs and
>>> better networking, rinse repeat make it better ... interesting ... exporting it
>>> all to somebody else's datacentre in a random part of the world ... not so
>>> interesting.
>>>
>>>
>> Do we need to start uk.tech.cannot-be-bothered ?
>>
> It's a deal !  :-)
>

It’s a bit of a relief to discover that others of my vintage share the same
thoughts. Perhaps we are going through the tech-opause?

Did the more retired members of this group go through a similar phase in
their late fifties?

On 21/10/2021 08:41, Tweed wrote:
> Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 20/10/2021 16:31, Tweed wrote:
>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>> Tweed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I’m similarly at the point of transitioning from thinking all my work is
>>>>> really quite interesting to feeling I can’t be bothered with it anymore.
>>>> Ditto really, moving from physical servers to virtual servers and SANs and
>>>> better networking, rinse repeat make it better ... interesting ... exporting it
>>>> all to somebody else's datacentre in a random part of the world ... not so
>>>> interesting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Do we need to start uk.tech.cannot-be-bothered ?
>>>
>> It's a deal !  :-)
>>
>
> It’s a bit of a relief to discover that others of my vintage share the same
> thoughts. Perhaps we are going through the tech-opause?
>
> Did the more retired members of this group go through a similar phase in
> their late fifties?

Yes. Although my work did not involve the sort of things discussed here,
it was medical-scientific based. I'd done it for 18 years as a company
employee, and then for another 11 as an independent consultant. After
feeling somewhat depressed and fed up with the work for a couple of
months, during the Christmas break I suddenly realised it was no longer
an intellectual challenge but had become a box-ticking chore. On
returning on 2nd January to the company I was working with, I told them
I was retiring on health grounds with immediate effect. I still had 8
months to go to my 60th. It was one of the best decisions I have ever made.

--

Jeff

On 21/10/2021 09:11, Jeff Layman wrote:
> Yes. Although my work did not involve the sort of things discussed here,
> it was medical-scientific based. I'd done it for 18 years as a company
> employee, and then for another 11 as an independent consultant. After
> feeling somewhat depressed and fed up with the work for a couple of
> months, during the Christmas break I suddenly realised it was no longer
> an intellectual challenge but had become a box-ticking chore. On
> returning on 2nd January to the company I was working with, I told them
> I was retiring on health grounds with immediate effect. I still had 8
> months to go to my 60th. It was one of the best decisions I have ever made.

I had to retire at 62 to look after my wife. I was really worried about
money but there wasn't a problem in fact. I've really enjoyed being
retired (except for her illness and death, and my illnesses, of course).

Bill

On 21/10/2021 16:43, williamwright wrote:
> On 21/10/2021 09:11, Jeff Layman wrote:
>> Yes. Although my work did not involve the sort of things discussed here,
>> it was medical-scientific based. I'd done it for 18 years as a company
>> employee, and then for another 11 as an independent consultant. After
>> feeling somewhat depressed and fed up with the work for a couple of
>> months, during the Christmas break I suddenly realised it was no longer
>> an intellectual challenge but had become a box-ticking chore. On
>> returning on 2nd January to the company I was working with, I told them
>> I was retiring on health grounds with immediate effect. I still had 8
>> months to go to my 60th. It was one of the best decisions I have ever made.
>
> I had to retire at 62 to look after my wife. I was really worried about
> money but there wasn't a problem in fact. I've really enjoyed being
> retired (except for her illness and death, and my illnesses, of course).

I remember reading your posts about your wife's (Hils?) poor health.
Within a few months of me retiring, my wife and I were helping to look
after her mother, and after she'd died we were looking after her father.
Money wasn't an important issue - we never had the time to spend it
anyway! As things worked out I would never had had the time to work, so
the retirement was very timely.

--

Jeff