|
tango alpha delta posted:One of our teams is using .xlsx files. No big deal, except they upload xlsx files to Sharepoint 2007, which has no loving clue what an xlsx file is. OK, so all I need to do is edit the DOCICONS.XML file and then do an IISRESET. No big deal, right? Except IISRESET is going to restart over twenty thousand Sharepoint sites, all of which are in production. A major outage because one team won't save their files as .xls. gently caress me. Has this been brought up with the team's manager? I feel like this is a pretty good example of a human problem being solved via technical means.
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:26 |
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:Has this been brought up with the team's manager? I feel like this is a pretty good example of a human problem being solved via technical means. What's the bet those spreadsheets have more than 65k rows? (which is a whole different problem)
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
tango alpha delta posted:One of our teams is using .xlsx files. No big deal, except they upload xlsx files to Sharepoint 2007, which has no loving clue what an xlsx file is. OK, so all I need to do is edit the DOCICONS.XML file and then do an IISRESET. No big deal, right? Except IISRESET is going to restart over twenty thousand Sharepoint sites, all of which are in production. A major outage because one team won't save their files as .xls. gently caress me. Just update the config file and then tell that team the fix is pending a service restart and they just need to rename their files as a workaround until the next time the server is rebooted for patching. By the time they figure out that the server is never going to be rebooted for patching, they'll be so used to renaming their files that it will be part of THE PROCESS and no one will complain anymore.  Also, obligatory "why the hell are you hosting twenty THOUSAND Sharepoint sites 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
I should start off by saying that I manage the small four-man support department at a specialty software manufacturer. Any time a ticket marked with the "HIGH - Angry customers / Serious issue" or "URGENT - Losing money RIGHT NOW" priority set comes in, everyone on the team, regardless of what we're doing, gets an SMS with the user's name and a brief summary of the ticket. We have a customer from Slovakia who does not speak, read, or write English but instead relies on mechanical translation. Ordinarily, this would be fine - We've got customers in many other nations, not all of which feature English as a language taught in schools. However, the unique combination of belligerence, mechanical translation, and one more habit are really pissing me off. For the first three years of his ownership of our software, this guy - We'll call him Jimmy, which is close enough to his real name but not it - only submitted High-priority tickets. For anything. System clock skew preventing your license from syncing properly? gently caress Googling it, just submit a High to support! I have some feature requests! Time for a high priority ticket! Need to renew an old license? That's high priority. But that's not all. Jimmy submits a high priority ticket, you ask him the questions you need to ask since he provided no detail, just a subject line, and he doesn't respond for 48 hours. We had a discussion with him about how you shouldn't submit frivolous high-priority tickets because of the scramble reaction and stress it causes to our very small support team. He agreed. Now the motherfucker only submits urgents, which send us SMSes every fifteen minutes until someone responds. I want to drive across the Atlantic ocean, my car held afloat purely by my rage, and beat this man to death.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
Exit Strategy posted:I should start off by saying that I manage the small four-man support department at a specialty software manufacturer. Any time a ticket marked with the "HIGH - Angry customers / Serious issue" or "URGENT - Losing money RIGHT NOW" priority set comes in, everyone on the team, regardless of what we're doing, gets an SMS with the user's name and a brief summary of the ticket. Why, exactly, are you not instituting a policy of fees for frivolous high priority tickets yet? He's getting a service, after all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Why, exactly, are you not instituting a policy of fees for frivolous high priority tickets yet? He's getting a service, after all. Operations management won't let me for some loving mysterious reason.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
GiveUpNed posted:I'm Canadian and get three weeks of paid vacation. On top of this I have bank time, so I normally have one month of vacation a year. I work for a well-known tech company which got itself a services division some years ago. The internal tools suck so bad. Everything is through RDS or Citrix which means it's broken half the time because Java isn't the One True Version (peace be upon her) and the other half it is slow slow slow. They also manage it poorly. It took me 9 months from my start date to get activities billing enabled. HR was known to just blow off tickets from people more important me about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Citrix environments. Well, just 1. A hospital runs about 90% off this poo poo and only allows 1 session but fails to realize when a session is logged out. We get calls 24/7 on THIS issue. Software company is like  Meanwhile, I'm getting fussed at with no fix in sight. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Irritated Goat posted:Citrix environments. Well, just 1. A hospital runs about 90% off this poo poo and only allows 1 session but fails to realize when a session is logged out. We get calls 24/7 on THIS issue. Software company is like You can change a timeout setting to allow disconnects to close rather than hang waiting for a reconnect. http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX127318 Not sure which version you are using but check that. To expand a bit, when you have an environment that allows only one session, if your gateway wants to send the user to a different application server than the one they disconnected from, it gives a concurrent connection error if there is still a disconnected session in the pool. You set a timeout to kill those disconnected sessions to avoid the problem. Demonachizer fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Jul 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
tango alpha delta posted:One of our teams is using .xlsx files. No big deal, except they upload xlsx files to Sharepoint 2007, which has no loving clue what an xlsx file is. OK, so all I need to do is edit the DOCICONS.XML file and then do an IISRESET. No big deal, right? Except IISRESET is going to restart over twenty thousand Sharepoint sites, all of which are in production. A major outage because one team won't save their files as .xls. gently caress me. IIS resets the app pool every night anyway at around 2am unless you've changed the default config because SharePoint is a memory-leaking piece of poo poo. 2 options here: recycle the app pool (this makes a new w3wp.exe process, shutting down the old one once all requests have completed) or just wait a day and see if the IIS auto-recycle is taking care of it. I've run SP for 5 years  . At least I've escaped, though. gently caress that product so much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
John Kruk posted:You can change a timeout setting to allow disconnects to close rather than hang waiting for a reconnect. Sadly, I don't have any control over it. We're just their 1st tier helpdesk. Yay for being an MSP!
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
tango alpha delta posted:One of our teams is using .xlsx files. No big deal, except they upload xlsx files to Sharepoint 2007, which has no loving clue what an xlsx file is. OK, so all I need to do is edit the DOCICONS.XML file and then do an IISRESET. No big deal, right? Except IISRESET is going to restart over twenty thousand Sharepoint sites, all of which are in production. A major outage because one team won't save their files as .xls. gently caress me. Do they need to use .xlsx or is it just the default in the version of Excel they use? Can you perhaps push out a group policy or similar to change their default file save type to .xls for the application?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
What's so difficult about recognizing xlsx out of the box? Hasn't that been a standard extension for like ten years now?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
stubblyhead posted:What's so difficult about recognizing xlsx out of the box? Hasn't that been a standard extension for like ten years now? I think it started with with Office 2007 alongside Windows Vista... So yeah it's been a while.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
VodeAndreas posted:I think it started with with Office 2007 alongside Windows Vista... So yeah it's been a while. Not to mention you could still open Office Open XML files in 2003 with a free compatibility pack from Microsoft. I'd say it's completely reasonable by now to use it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
Just had my first "Internet on this PC is broek!" 404 Error call. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
Oh hey, 2nd time in a month that everyone with an Iphone gets locked out because a domain controller crapped itself. gently caress our sys admins.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 13:15
|
|
|
jim truds posted:Oh hey, 2nd time in a month that everyone with an Iphone gets locked out because a domain controller crapped itself. gently caress our sys admins. What could they possibly be doing to a domain controller where it shits the bed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Moey posted:What could they possibly be doing to a domain controller where it shits the bed? I don't have the story about what happened this time, emails are still flying around, but last time the domain controllers system time got out of sync with everything else so MobileIron stopped syncing to the DC. Everyone's Iphone stops receiving email and their account locks out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
jim truds posted:I don't have the story about what happened this time, emails are still flying around, but last time the domain controllers system time got out of sync with everything else so MobileIron stopped syncing to the DC. Everyone's Iphone stops receiving email and their account locks out. I feel like having proper time on your network is a pretty simple task to do. There is a reason I do not trust other people's work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Moey posted:I feel like having proper time on your network is a pretty simple task to do. There is a reason I do not trust other people's work. It would be if they didn't block port 123. I'm just on the helpdesk so I just see the fallout of this and some of the errors that it causes but things like this give me the impression our admins here are a complete poo poo show.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
One of our other offices (more like a store, really) had a power outage this morning. Bitch manager of the store (who is at our main office) has emailed me asking "Why hasn't this been fixed yet?" It was fixed 2 hours ago, which was 1/2 an hour BEFORE the time promised to us by the utility company which was in the email that I sent out to everyone first thing this morning when we found out the power was down. Same lady who asked us "Why did the storm damage our phone lines?" a few weeks ago. BECAUSE ITS A STORM
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Moey posted:I feel like having proper time on your network is a pretty simple task to do. We have a customer where every few months we have to go in and fix the fact that our appliance can no longer talk to their AD server. Because the times have drifted too much. Because their networking team (for some reason) decided to stop our appliance from talking to their NTP servers. Seems like by the time you get to the point your org has a dedicated "network team" you're running the risk that they may be so busy concentrating on (often meaningless) network security that they don't think through (or don't know/don't want to know) the fact that Kerberos wants the time at both ends to be "close" AND that there may be specialised devices on the network using AD as some form of single sign on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
jim truds posted:It would be if they didn't block port 123. Been there. I was asked to perform a risk analysis before they'd approve the firewall change to open it between a new remote site and the core network. 'It's not in the design docs'.  (Port 135 wasn't in there eighter, but a firewall change is so much hassle we just RDP to some random server on the inside if we need to look at eventlogs and such)
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
ookiimarukochan posted:We have a customer where every few months we have to go in and fix the fact that our appliance can no longer talk to their AD server. Because the times have drifted too much. Because their networking team (for some reason) decided to stop our appliance from talking to their NTP servers. Seems like by the time you get to the point your org has a dedicated "network team" you're running the risk that they may be so busy concentrating on (often meaningless) network security that they don't think through (or don't know/don't want to know) the fact that Kerberos wants the time at both ends to be "close" AND that there may be specialised devices on the network using AD as some form of single sign on. Wasnt there some NTP hack that got a bunch of publicity this winter? Maybe they were worried about that. Although I thought that people just figured a way to spoof their location and basically use it as a DoS tool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
I think that affected compromised NTP servers. Sounds like the firewall in that example was blocking NTP traffic between LAN subnets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
BaseballPCHiker posted:Wasnt there some NTP hack that got a bunch of publicity this winter? Maybe they were worried about that. Although I thought that people just figured a way to spoof their location and basically use it as a DoS tool. The monlist command of ntp can send a large amount of data in return to a query. That was a big thing this winter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Filthy Lucre posted:The monlist command of ntp can send a large amount of data in return to a query. That was a big thing this winter. reflection attacks are awesome But disabling NTP won't actually protect you against them, though it can help protect others from you if you have a badly configured server.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
I work at a Managed Services Provider that is a Microsoft Partner, with a focus on progressive IT instead of reactive IT. We do helpdesk support, but a decent chunk of what we do amounts to consultation and setting up Office 365-related environments for our managed service clients, as it works great and we're all well-versed in it enough to be able to troubleshoot everything. Failing that, we have direct Tier 2 support for cloud-based services. Basically, perfect storm of "poo poo That Makes Office365 (Besides Sharepoint) Worthwhile and Practical" We have a longstanding client that refuses to upgrade IT. New computers are purchased at Best Buy with Home Premium licenses and 30GB Solid State Drives, despite our repeated guidance on how/where to purchase new machines. We only managed to convert him to Office 365 after Exchange 2003 support ended, and we quoted him a new server with Exchange 2013 on Server 2012 versus Office 365 subscriptions. Despite being told, repeatedly, to spring for an Enterprise licensing plan, he opted for a cheaper plan that won't allow anything to be built on top of it. We are now a few months into this contract, when he wants us to figure out a way to set up full-email Office 365 encryption for everyone there. Which he cannot do with his plan. He needs the Enterprise plan we quoted him. After explaining this, he decided he'll go with a 3rd party option (which will almost assuredly have hosed up poo poo going on with Office 365) because it is "cheaper" (IE: He won't have to pay more for his O365 licenses, despite paying full price for a third-party system). If this breaks at any point down the line, we are going to have to play Vendor Tag with whatever company is the other vendor, and loving Microsoft, until they can figure out where to point the fingers. During the process, he has submitted multiple tickets to our helpdesk queue. He's essentially trying to get somebody in the office to tell him "Oh yeah sure, that's a great idea, let's get right on it" instead of kicking the quote for the project kicked right back at him. Things not pissing me off: If the client doubles down and decides to go through with this, we're probably going to bill them for the entire project (which will take much longer than setting up O365 Encryption) and then drop them like a sack of potatoes  And this still pales in comparison to the company that signed a contract to work with us, got set up with Enterprise licensing, was even waffling about getting Azure serverspace, and then turned around and bought 24 brand new Macbook Pros.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
You know what really pisses me off? When a large software company decides that all of their contractors will work a maximum of 18 months. And after that must take at least a six month break from the company. Despite those contractors literally being the ones that are running all of your infrastructure. I'm sure they'll all be glad to stay on the full 18 months in order to train the next batch of suckers. I suppose I can't be too shocked, in this economy I guess large businesses are able to say, "Hey, come work for us, we'll make you buy all your own equipment and benefits, give you no paid holidays or sick days, hold you to the same standards as FTEs and we will guarantee this job had no future." *70,000 positions are instantly filled.*
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Not to mention you could still open Office Open XML files in 2003 with a free compatibility pack from Microsoft. All very good points. If I had been the original owner, this would have been done a long time ago. However, we've only recently inherited the entire corporate Sharepoint servers. The original admins have 'moved on' and we are in discovery mode. I work for a medium sized company, with about twenty thousand employees. (To me, large companies have over 100000 employees.). It looks like the original admins for Sharepoint pretty much gave anyone full control, hence the twenty thousand sites in production that will need to be restarted. It's a loving mess. Oh, well, time to step up and be the hero. gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
Salesman are back for FY15  Any updates are appreciated, we are getting closer to our deadlines, and could you please provide me with an update when you are ready to move forward? Also none of them use valedictions on their emails 
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 12:41
|
|
|
spidoman posted:You know what really pisses me off? When a large software company decides that all of their contractors will work a maximum of 18 months. And after that must take at least a six month break from the company. edit: typo EAT THE EGGS RICOLA fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Jul 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
spidoman posted:You know what really pisses me off? When a large software company decides that all of their contractors will work a maximum of 18 months. And after that must take at least a six month break from the company. This is actually a legal thing. The thinking goes that if they work more than 18 months, then they should be full time employees, and the contractors could sue or involve the labor board or whatever to be made permanent. I quit a job like this in the 90's. Contractors were a max of 18 months. I had worked there for 12 months, was 3 months into the fiscal year, and there was a hiring freeze for the rest of the year. I knew I only had 6 more months and started looking.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
spidoman posted:You know what really pisses me off? When a large software company decides that all of their contractors will work a maximum of 18 months. And after that must take at least a six month break from the company. Don't work contract jobs like this then. Jobs like this exist because people don't value themselves. Be the change you want to see. Speaking of bad long term contracts, I am still getting one or two phone calls a day from [insert random contract company]. I probably get one a week and wants to argue with me over contract to hire positions that I dismiss as contract positions. Some of these recruiters get a little touchy when I argue a faint promise of being hired at the end of the contract position doesn't somehow make the position not contract anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
Our contractors cannot work for us longer than 12 months without taking 6 months off. It's really easy for a supposed 'contractor' to make the argument they should be an employee, especially in California.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
I usually get one or two phone calls a week from Indian recruiters who think I'll be perfect for a six-month contract doing desktop support in Bumblefuck, Wyoming or, even worse, migrating to Blackberry Enterprise Server in New Jersey. I let them stumble through mispronouncing my name a few times, then tell them I'm not interested. It's not even fun to mess with them any more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
Wizard of the Deep posted:I usually get one or two phone calls a week from Indian recruiters who think I'll be perfect for a six-month contract doing desktop support in Bumblefuck, Wyoming or, even worse, migrating to Blackberry Enterprise Server in New Jersey.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
Wizard of the Deep posted:migrating to Blackberry Enterprise Server in New Jersey.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:26 |
|
|
Holy loving god, how hard is it to remember you submitted a ticket? You have a site that tells you what tickets you have open! If I tell you it's for 1 thing, don't ask if it's for another thing.   Hi I'm calling about <issue a> Is this about <issue b>? No, <issue a> I don't think we put a ticket in for that I'm looking at it? Oh, yeah. I guess we did.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2014 16:28
|
|