On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:02 AM Jim Oberholtzer <
What I really don't get is why companies will spend millions keeping the
Microsoft environments completely up to date with patches every month, but
they won't give the workhorse in the data center the same due.
It could simply be because of a lack of redundancy. In 2002 when I first
became a third shift operator, our main client did a full backup nightly
(the head iSeries admin didn't trust save while active, and I never
understood the nuances of it enough to have an opinion on the matter) .
They also had backup systems that used some third party journal shipping
product so that the users had read only access to the systems during the
backups. They applied PTFs on a frequent but not quite regular basis. It
was limited by the fact that someone had to order optical media and make
the time in the day to do it.
On the other hand, a client I had last year shut down for physical
inventory twice a year due. They never completed physical inventory in
these periods and there was one IPL per year during one of these shutdowns.
I don't know why they didn't just buy a second box. Nothing ever blew up is
Since any given windows server is cheaper than any given IBMi (unless you
have the smallest IBMi and a big sql server attached to a big SAN) its
cheaper to add redundancy to any given server that requires 5 9s. Its
easier to slowly expand the windows server budget than to instantaneously
double the IBMi budget/