What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller Both. The system it runs on. The system that hosts the database it uses, and the LAN that connects them.
It's a general purpose database that does other things AND the website?
No. Database is just for the website. Box 1 is IIS that runs a .net application (that's basically the business) which talks to a SQL server database (Box 2) as well as a SMTP server (Box 3, which also runs REDIS and our backup software).
If that statement is true, then you need no further information and there is no reason that the website runs locally - it was just a mistake or oversight. No one to check with, no need to follow up. You know from that statement, assuming that it is correct, that you can just package up the databases and the web server and host them externally. There is no environmental dependency, it's fully contained as its own thing.
That's what I figured, which is why when I've inquired a few time about "why aren't we hosting this on X" the answer basically boils down to this is how it's been for a decade or two. Goal of the person in charge is to get to where all of this runs in something like Azure rather than running on our servers at a data center.
Problem = I'm not in a position to decree it to be done and start the process.
-
Heading to rehearsal.
-
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller Both. The system it runs on. The system that hosts the database it uses, and the LAN that connects them.
It's a general purpose database that does other things AND the website?
No. Database is just for the website. Box 1 is IIS that runs a .net application (that's basically the business) which talks to a SQL server database (Box 2) as well as a SMTP server (Box 3, which also runs REDIS and our backup software).
If that statement is true, then you need no further information and there is no reason that the website runs locally - it was just a mistake or oversight. No one to check with, no need to follow up. You know from that statement, assuming that it is correct, that you can just package up the databases and the web server and host them externally. There is no environmental dependency, it's fully contained as its own thing.
That's what I figured, which is why when I've inquired a few time about "why aren't we hosting this on X" the answer basically boils down to this is how it's been for a decade or two. Goal of the person in charge is to get to where all of this runs in something like Azure rather than running on our servers at a data center.
Problem = I'm not in a position to decree it to be done and start the process.
I'm starting to sense a pattern in other companies as I see in mine. The true IT pros are the ones pushing buttons and pulling levers, but are not the ones that can often make choices like this.
Therefore, how do we talk to management in a way as to persuade them to make a decision? Go back to business talk? For so long as we're running on local hardware it costs us so much per month with these pros and cons versus hosting it somewhere else with these pros and cons?
-
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller Both. The system it runs on. The system that hosts the database it uses, and the LAN that connects them.
It's a general purpose database that does other things AND the website?
No. Database is just for the website. Box 1 is IIS that runs a .net application (that's basically the business) which talks to a SQL server database (Box 2) as well as a SMTP server (Box 3, which also runs REDIS and our backup software).
If that statement is true, then you need no further information and there is no reason that the website runs locally - it was just a mistake or oversight. No one to check with, no need to follow up. You know from that statement, assuming that it is correct, that you can just package up the databases and the web server and host them externally. There is no environmental dependency, it's fully contained as its own thing.
That's what I figured, which is why when I've inquired a few time about "why aren't we hosting this on X" the answer basically boils down to this is how it's been for a decade or two. Goal of the person in charge is to get to where all of this runs in something like Azure rather than running on our servers at a data center.
Problem = I'm not in a position to decree it to be done and start the process.
Likely it's nothing more than an afternoon project.
-
@NerdyDad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller Both. The system it runs on. The system that hosts the database it uses, and the LAN that connects them.
It's a general purpose database that does other things AND the website?
No. Database is just for the website. Box 1 is IIS that runs a .net application (that's basically the business) which talks to a SQL server database (Box 2) as well as a SMTP server (Box 3, which also runs REDIS and our backup software).
If that statement is true, then you need no further information and there is no reason that the website runs locally - it was just a mistake or oversight. No one to check with, no need to follow up. You know from that statement, assuming that it is correct, that you can just package up the databases and the web server and host them externally. There is no environmental dependency, it's fully contained as its own thing.
That's what I figured, which is why when I've inquired a few time about "why aren't we hosting this on X" the answer basically boils down to this is how it's been for a decade or two. Goal of the person in charge is to get to where all of this runs in something like Azure rather than running on our servers at a data center.
Problem = I'm not in a position to decree it to be done and start the process.
I'm starting to sense a pattern in other companies as I see in mine. The true IT pros are the ones pushing buttons and pulling levers, but are not the ones that can often make choices like this.
Therefore, how do we talk to management in a way as to persuade them to make a decision? Go back to business talk? For so long as we're running on local hardware it costs us so much per month with these pros and cons versus hosting it somewhere else with these pros and cons?
Back to business talk? That's all we should ever do unless talking to other IT folk and even then most of the time.
Not only should you talk that way. You need to think that way.
-
@NerdyDad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I'm starting to sense a pattern in other companies as I see in mine. The true IT pros are the ones pushing buttons and pulling levers, but are not the ones that can often make choices like this.
This can be a mistake of management letting the wrong people be in charge. But often it is a mistake of IT not doing their role in being part of the business.
The demarcation point between IT and business has to happen somewhere. If IT people talk in tech terms, they cannot be the demarcation point and someone else has to be. If that person doesn't understand the tech and/or doesn't understand the business, bad information gets passed on.
That's why I push IT so hard about how to think about things, why we think in risk terms and financials all of the time. That's our bread and butter. The button pushing isn't what makes us valuable, that's icing, not the cake.
-
Changing how we think, though, is a good first step. Make ROI and TCO things that are in your head all of the time, not just things that you go to when you need to convince management of something. Also, you shouldn't need to think about how to convince management because, in theory, whatever convinced you should be the same thing that convinces them.
Example: You want to update to Windows 2016 from 2012 R2. That's great, but why do you want to upgrade? Is there a new feature that will save you money? How much money? Does it provide better protection, better performance or less management time?
If you can't convince management of doing something, there are three significant possibilities:
- You work for morons.
- You want to do something you shouldn't want to do.
- You didn't communicate properly.
Chances are, morons didn't end up owning a business (but they do decently often, it's far from a zero change.) So more likely it's either a communications thing or you want to do something for a non-business reason. And in business, non-business reasons are wrong.
-
When you think in business terms, you'll talk in business terms. When you have a drink with the owner after work instead of raving about the latest cool feature in the filesystem that means nothing to him, you might chat about product lifecycles and lower cost of implementation with greater predicability to increase planning potential.
Understanding things like Capex, Opex, Sunk Cost, Time Value of Money, TCO, ROI and such and putting everything that IT does into those terms changes how departments interact with IT.
-
Grilling out
-
At rehearsal now. I'll catch up with the thread when I get home. This conversation (tone and usefulness ) is the exact reason why I came and have stayed with this community.
-
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
At rehearsal now. I'll catch up with the thread when I get home. This conversation (tone and usefulness ) is the exact reason why I came and have stayed with this community.
Yup, I stick around to see Dustin drink beer and grill, too.
-
I'll be pretty quiet here in a few, about to head out the door to drink on Veeam's dime all night.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I'll be pretty quiet here in a few, about to head out the door to drink on Veeam's dime all night.
Lucky... get Veeam to get their asses to MC this year.
-
@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I'll be pretty quiet here in a few, about to head out the door to drink on Veeam's dime all night.
Lucky... get Veeam to get their asses to MC this year.
That'll be tough. But I'm trying. Gotta poke @Rick-Vanover about that.
-
@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I'll be pretty quiet here in a few, about to head out the door to drink on Veeam's dime all night.
Lucky... get Veeam to get their asses to MC this year.
At least to sponsor
-
I do have info on the local Veeam solutions architect in Dallas. Hoping to get him to the MangoMeetup there.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I do have info on the local Veeam solutions architect in Dallas. Hoping to get him to the MangoMeetup there.
Nice
-
@NerdyDad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I'll be pretty quiet here in a few, about to head out the door to drink on Veeam's dime all night.
Lucky... get Veeam to get their asses to MC this year.
At least to sponsor
Maybe we can get Ratmir to attend!
-
@Rick-Vanover Did you need to show up at MangoCon 2017!
We've got some kick add food up here in Rochester Ny.
-
All the Veeam guys will be so excited about the garbage plates.
