Re: Sv: Setting the date ahead for Y2K testing

[Glenn Ericson <Glenn-Ericson@xxxxxxx>]

Peter
I  think the second system concept is there for a  few  possible  reasons:

A - Productivity & Isolation of  development impact to production system
B - An additional shield to prevent against costly Oops none of us want to
      happen.
C - If one could not afford a second AS/400 then why not use either : 
        + a  DR site
        + short term lease box for the initial integrated full systems testing
   to reduce risks

How might your solution handle testing through the project life cycle stages?
[from Unit, application, etc, thru inter/intra-system]
One might think data agers /comparators, & simulators  would be helpful 
unless you have some other solution, which aids with multiple date testing.

Glenn
___________________________________________________
Glenn Ericson,          Phoenix Consulting                      
P O Box 701164   East Elmhurst NY 11370-3164 USA                            
Phone 718 898 9805       Fax 718 446 1150
AS/400 & Year 2000- - Solutions Specialists
____________________________________________________

>Glenn writes:
>>Peter:
>The  case you are suggesting  should be the final  phase of the activities
>after  the greatest  percentages of testing  has been  done.  I am sure you
>and  your client  do not want  large scale  SAV/RSTSTG activities
>happening to often.<
>
Peter O'Connor,  wrote:
>What I am suggesting is when you think you are done with Y2K modifications.
> You have to do the method I suggest or you will be dead in the water with
>many applications.  Most companies are NOT doing a test after the believe
>all the changes are finished.  They are doing minor testing of individual
>programs and NOT the entire system.  
>
>One has to judge when this is done based upon the particular companies
>applications,  how automated the applications are and finally the amount of
>system functions which are date related.
>
>My method for some companies could be the very last test or it could be
>conducted multiple times depending on the complexity of the applications. 
>Of course, the company has to have time to do this and a lot do not.  That
>is why IBM is pushing an additional system to do testing on.
>
>Peter H. O'Connor
==================
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---