Comment I'm probably wrong but....

I'm probably thinking all wrong but just in case I would love some validation, suggestions, or plain all fashion "Rod, Your stupid" comments.

I work for a publicly traded company (no names please) with a significant number of installations. We're running OpenEdge 10.2A (un-patched) on Suse Linux. I've been unsuccessful in convincing anyone in management that not only is an upgrade is warranted but required. The near future plan, as it's been communicated to me (so disclaimers apply) is to stay on 10.1A and move to a new flavor of Linux that is not on the supported Linux platform listed by Progress.

Begin Rant:

We're going to continue to operate (un-patched) on an OpenEdge platform that was introduced in 2008, retired in 2010 and on an OS that is not supported by the vendor and we find the risk, not to mention the unknown security risk acceptable? Am I missing something? Just say that out loud. What part of that makes you say, "Yep, sounds like a great plan it me!".

End Rant.

Rod
 

Cringer

ProgressTalk.com Moderator
Staff member
Rant away. Your employer sucks! lol Yeah this makes no sense at all. You could at least go to 10.2B08 (not ideal but better than currently) without too much difficulty.
 

TheMadDBA

Active Member
I see your problem here.... you are thinking rationally.

You have to think more like a manager. They get to save money now and will try and shift blame when the problem actually happens.
 

TheMadDBA

Active Member
In all seriousness... The only thing you can do is to try and clearly state your case and document that you had those discussions with the appropriate people. At least that will provide some measure of shielding for you when it all goes wrong.

I had asked for the budget to enable replication several times and been denied. When we had our first disaster that required a restore having all that documented helped out quite a bit. I survived the post disaster purge.. the people that denied the budget not so much.
 

LarryD

Active Member
One thing I might mention is that just because the flavor of Linux you are going to is not on the "supported" list does not mean it won't run on other flavors of Linux.

We've ran 10.2B08 on Ubuntu with no issues, which as I recall is not on the list. Cannot vouch for OE11.x though...
 

Rob Fitzpatrick

ProgressTalk.com Sponsor
You're not wrong.

Some people can't stay out of their own way. I feel for you; I really do.

I can only second TheMadDBA's comments: write the business case (which is so obvious that it shouldn't need to be documented, but...) and cover your butt in triplicate. With any luck, a re-org or other change will bring in someone who will listen to reason. Your write-up will provide a roadmap for positive change and will reflect well on you as well.
 

TomBascom

Curmudgeon
Additionally... if there are currently ongoing problems in your environment that could be solved by an upgrade those should also be documented. (Poor performance, unreliability, lack of features in the application...)

The attached pptx might be helpful. (Although I had to tack a ".txt" on it to get it uploaded.)

One last thing -- Progress charges a higher annual maintenance for ancient, obsolete and unsupported releases.
Staying up to date is painless and actually saves money.

Falling behind is expensive. Unless of course the dimwits making this decision are thinking that not paying maintenance is a good idea -- if they are going down that route then things will be extraordinarily expensive when they eventually do have to upgrade. They will get to pay all the back maintenance plus a 25% penalty... you might want to document that too.
 

Attachments

  • upgrade.pptx.txt
    908.6 KB · Views: 3

RealHeavyDude

Well-Known Member
Maybe there is not much I can add to the discussion that makes much sense to you ...

Nevertheless, in bigger companies, especially in the financial industry, risk management has become a big part of the game. Not that they would fund anyhting, but the can put a lot of pressure on managers that lack willingness to mitigate operational risks. Not only do they do that, what they love most is evidence for mitigation or compliance - so that their butts are save.

Running, or, attempting to run an outdated software on an unsupported platform is as big as an operational risk as it can get. Full stop.

It took me more than 3 years to get our application from OE1o.1c to OE11.3. For a long time it seemed like a fight against windmills but then I managed to have the application risk assessed for some other reason. You wouldn't believe how fast an action plan to upgrade has been in place and the stakeholders had to find the funding for it whether they liked it or not. They even had to face some hard questions and discussion. In the end, what do I care, if it has to be that way - then it has to be that way.

Heavy Regards, RealHeavyDude.
 
Top