| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 42.1 | | KERNEL::ANTHONY | | Thu Jun 01 1989 22:54 | 86 |
|
Hello All,
I know you are all working on ideas to make our lives
easier and make us more efficient. However there is one area that
I feel that has not really been addressed...
I think that the way we acquire, keep and pass on technical
information can be greatly improved.
I am constantly being frustated when trying to get technical
information when working out of hours (weekends and evenings). The
sort of information I mean is typically on a system that I am not
trained on or have little experience of. It is not necessarily of
a highly complex nature, It can be really basic and the solution
should therefore be readily available. I have lost count the number
of times I have had to rummage around the systems group looking
for even the simplest of information on Nautilus, or Polar Star,
or Calypso or...
I think that the problem is really, that there are such a lot of
systems to cover, and so many places were the information MAY lie...
I want to be able to go to one source of information, where
I'll be 90% sure of finding the solution.
The answer is : I propose we build our own database of
MODEL SOLUTIONS using NOTES. Now before you all shoot me down and
say "It'll never work", let me explain a bit further...
Each technical subject will be allotted a conference eg, 11780/11785,
Nautilus, Calypso, PDP on so on. Each topic in the conference will
cover one aspect eg "how is the RDC connection implemented"
"how do I boot standalone DS"
"what is the FCO status to-date"
"how do I @crash this system"
"what is the layout of the power supplies"
"what is INT54 and how do I decode it"
"how and why did I get to the ROM> prompt"
and so on.
Each conference will be read only. Write access only allowed by
those persons responsible. Each database will be built by a team
of engineers deemed to be specialists in that area. The team will
be probably 2 engineers (perhaps sometimes 1 or 3 but preferably 2),
working together, validating entries into the database.
The databases would have to be ordered such that similar information
would be found in the same topic across the CPU databases.
I propose a lead time (say 3-4 months) before we go live.
After that time the databases would be available for use. They
would certainly not be complete, but useable. Once in use, if the
information was not in the database, the requesting engineer
would simply mail the owners of the conference with brief details
of the request.
The responsible engineers would then use THEIR expertise to create
a model solution and post it into the database. Over time, I believe
we can build up an indispensible database(s) that will greatly aid
our efficiency.
What are the advantages over our current way(s) of working?
Simple... we will have expert answers to everyday questions...
We can all be experts.
Perhaps equally as important is the fact that we will be seen to
improve the overall teamwork whithin the Systems group.
A suggested list of databases and responsible engineers follows :
R Hoblin/Brian Anthony 11780/11785
N Pettet/B Adams 8600/8650
D Wrighton/R Scott 11750
B Muir/S Edmunds 8200/8300
N Bland/K Robb 6200/6300/6400
J Travell/R Mountford 8500/8700/8800
B Sowton/S Wibrew Polar Star
B Sowton/N Garnett PDP's
J Travell/S Wibrew VMS
B Adams/N Pettet DCL and MACRO
D Wrighton/T Bartley Clusters
B Anthony/R Scott CRASH
S Edmunds Ultrix
R Hoblin/A James Scripts/Tools
Your opinions please.
It takes a genius to think up the simplest of ideas :-}
Brian.
|
| 42.2 | Look to the STARS !!! | KERNEL::SOWTON | Diagnosis does it down the phone.. | Fri Jun 02 1989 01:46 | 76 |
| RE:- 42.1
I think the basic idea is very sound and worthwhile and fits in very well
with a 'fix once' philosophy. However, why re-invent the wheel ?
We already have the necessary medium to find information, it's called,
wait for it, STARS !!!
>> I want to be able to go to one source of information, where
>> I'll be 90% sure of finding the solution.
If it's been put there....you'll find it !!!
>> The answer is : I propose we build our own database of
>> MODEL SOLUTIONS using NOTES. Now before you all shoot me down and
>> say "It'll never work", let me explain a bit further...
>> Each technical subject will be allotted a conference eg, 11780/11785,
>> Nautilus, Calypso, PDP on so on. Each topic in the conference will
>> cover one aspect eg "how is the RDC connection implemented"
>> "how do I boot standalone DS"
>> "what is the FCO status to-date"
>> "how do I @crash this system"
>> "what is the layout of the power supplies"
>> "what is INT54 and how do I decode it"
>> "how and why did I get to the ROM> prompt"
>> and so on.
These are exactly the sort of strings you could enter into the STARS search
screen and get the information you require, provided that it's been entered
previously and unambiguously. NOTES is very good but just wasn't designed
for multiple text searches....especially on a conference with a lot of topics
( which would happen with this idea ).
However, the critism that 'I never find what I want in there' (mentioned
to me verbally), is purely and simply the fact that NO-ONE HAS PUT IT THERE !
A recent mail message sent out from TIMA showed a distinct lack of contributions
from Remote Services...(apologies to those few who have submitted).
>> Perhaps equally as important is the fact that we will be seen to
>> improve the overall teamwork whithin the Systems group.
Not only the group but the COMPANY....(fix once philosophy)
>> A suggested list of databases and responsible engineers follows :
>> R Hoblin/Brian Anthony 11780/11785
>> N Pettet/B Adams 8600/8650
>> D Wrighton/R Scott 11750
>> B Muir/S Edmunds 8200/8300
>> N Bland/K Robb 6200/6300/6400
>> J Travell/R Mountford 8500/8700/8800
>> B Sowton/S Wibrew Polar Star
>> B Sowton/N Garnett PDP's
>> J Travell/S Wibrew VMS
>> B Adams/N Pettet DCL and MACRO
>> D Wrighton/T Bartley Clusters
>> B Anthony/R Scott CRASH
>> S Edmunds Ultrix
>> R Hoblin/A James Scripts/Tools
Great idea !!...Just submit the articles to STARS that's all !!!
>> It takes a genius to think up the simplest of ideas :-}
Yes, but lets make it practical !!!!
Bob
|
| 42.3 | Do I understand Brians intentions? | KERNEL::HOBLIN | | Sat Jun 03 1989 23:02 | 41 |
| I have to agree in principle with Brian. I think there is a need for
a simple means of accessing information about the systems we connect to, the
RSDS software, VMS, Ultrix, Champ FSU etc. We used to have such a system when
we were runing the call handling system on the 1170.
NOTES, I would suggest is designed as a conference utility so that
people can all add their 2 cents worth of input and once added can only be
hidden or another reply added. I am sure that I would want to correct or update
entries and as NOTES does'nt allow this I would'nt want NOTES used as the
vehicle for the implementation.
STARS has the advantage of sharing information with everyone, but I
find has the dissadvantage of offering me too much to choose from and one needs
to be something of a clairvoyant to choose the right key words, logical ANDs
and ORs etc. Its great for what its designed for, but do you want 50 plus
entries to peruse at you leasure when all you want to do is get some errors
printed out on an 1144 running RSX11M when you have never heard of ELI or RPT?
The point I am making is that we need help on every day things, if we
are not familiar with them, and STARS is'nt realy there for duplication of
information manuals etc. We are in a special case because the calls we deal
with are live and some simple help available at our finger tips is what we
require at 03:00 in the morning.
I think the idea is great, but would like to see it implemented in a
disciplined menu driven format so that engineers would know where to go to get
specific information.
I might have misunderstood Brians intentions, but I am assuming the
objective is to provide help in jumping all the hurdles and obstacles in the
way of diagnosing a customers problem. When we have the information about the
problem then STARS should be used to try and solve the problem.
Regards Richard Hoblin.
P.S.
I had pointed out to Brian in a mail message that 11/725 and 11/730
were not assigned in the list sent out. Brian had replied that the number of
calls on these products did'nt warrant inclusion. I feel the exact opposite to
be true. The products I deal with frequently I don't need help on, 11/84 and
11/730s I need all the help I can get!
|
| 42.4 | Think Wider | KERNEL::WOODWARD | If you've got an itch, scratch it | Mon Jun 05 1989 09:40 | 8 |
| The idea's good and should be implimented, but STARS, for all its
problems, must be the medium used. Why? simply because systems group,
or all diagnosis even, are not the only people who require this
information. STARS is available at the branches and throughout the
organisation generally. We should be making our skills and knowledge
as widely available as possible.
Steve
|
| 42.5 | Use STARS | KERNEL::JAMES | Alan James CSC Basingstoke | Mon Jun 05 1989 19:20 | 18 |
| > re 42.1
>
> I think that the way we acquire, keep and pass on technical
> information can be greatly improved.
Quite agree. Many of us are frustrated our inability to
retrieve technical data with ease. However the method you suggested
should be modified extensively to include STARS .....
Better still why don't you pass your thoughts on to members
of the 'TIMA Users Technical Forum' as they are putting great effort
into solving this problem. Members of this forum include :-
Sue Stevens Management Representative
Brian Lindley Organiser and Co-ordinator
Steve Wibrew Systems Hardware Diagnosis Representative
a.
|
| 42.6 | Make your voice heard. | KERNEL::ADAMS | Venus on Remote Control | Mon Jun 05 1989 22:37 | 22 |
|
I agree that we need better access to information, to do our job,
but this must be via STARS or whatever takes it's place.
Notes is fine for what it was intended for, but Technical Info MUST
be in a "purpose built" medium, i.e STARS.
I know there are problems, and I will agree with some other
contributors to this note. It's not easy to get the info at times.
However, can I ask people to take a little time, to help themselves
and/or others, at a later date. If you have problems, getting the
right info out of STARS, please note down your query, all the keywords
etc that you tried as inputs to Stars, whether you used English
or Boolean input and anything else that might be useful.
THEN
Pass this info to the relevant Support engineer downstairs, so
that things can be improved. Without knowing what your problems
are, STARS will not be improved. Don't keep the problems to
yourselves, pass them to the people who can do something about it.
|
| 42.7 | Consider this senario | KERNEL::HOBLIN | | Tue Jun 06 1989 05:49 | 31 |
| Lets assume that STARS has been agreed as the way to implement our
objectives. I propose the following simple senario...
An engineer has connected to a VMS system and the customer has setup
the password for FIELD but everytime the engineer logs in he gets "user
authorization failure". Neither the customer nor the engineer is aware that
there is a DISUSER flag that can be modified to NODISUSER.
There is an entry in the RDC STARS database with a tile "Problems
Logging In" which contains tips on logging into the various software systems
that are encountered by RDC. The entry contains the solution to the engineers
problem, but the engineer does'nt know this.(This is hypothetical as the entry
currently does'nt exit.)
Using likey keywords and with the databases selected in my login.com I
get between 58 and 218 items to choose from. What is the simplest way to access
this "Problem Logging In" entry such that it appears in a list of entries
taking up no more than one screen? I will of course accept that only the RDC
STARS database has been selected, but that the engineer will only be using the
key words..... login,user,authorization and failure. Be aware that it is
relativley easy to work back wards and be wise after the event.
Contrast the STARS approach with "DT" diagnostic tools, or the way it
starts anyway, where the uninformed user is presented with a choice from a menu
of items, selecting an item from the menu then allows the user to be presented
with another menu and so on until the entry containing the help is encountered.
Why don't we put the Parts Database Base on STARS and see if access is
more efficient! It would certainly be available to a wider audiance.
Regards Richard Hoblin.
|
| 42.8 | Scenario considered... | KERNEL::SOWTON | Diagnosis does it down the phone.. | Tue Jun 06 1989 19:16 | 19 |
|
Two answers....
Search on "user authorization failure" ( This assumes someone has
entered the text that you described in your scenario, which of course
you would, wouldn't you ? ).
OR...log into a different account on the customers system.
RE your second point...putting PARTS on STARS is an excellent idea,
except that you'd need to know the part number before looking it
up...probably not very efficient. :-)
Cheers
Bob
|
| 42.9 | If all else fails -- R.T.F.M. | KERNEL::ADAMS | Venus on Remote Control | Tue Jun 06 1989 21:14 | 21 |
|
I have to assume from some previous entries, that the problem is
really a lack of knowledge on how to use STARS, rather than that
the information is not there.
To take Richard's example, if one does a Boolean search on
(User Authorisation Failure) and Login
Followed by a Sub-Query of "Field", for the Field account that the
engineer is trying to log-in to;
One ends up with 7 entries to look through.
Not bad eh !!! and we only used info supplied from the problem.
There is available a "Stars Query Guide" from Ops Support, if anyone
needs a copy (or I'll photocopy mine for a small consideration.)
Also if you speak nicely to Norman Bland, he can point you at an
on-line self paced course to learn all about STARS.
|
| 42.10 | STARS reqires corect Speling | KERNEL::HOBLIN | | Wed Jun 07 1989 03:19 | 7 |
| U ar al two polight. Eye whil gif ay cocanut too thugh ferst free repleyes
too piont ought al mi speling misteakes inn repli .7.
Reegards Ritchard Hoblyn
P.S.
Iff eye gett thugh keey wurds spelt rite STARS mite wurk!
|