[Info-vax] Current VMS engineering quality, was: Re: What's VMS up to these

[David Froble]

Paul Sture wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 19:58:03 -0700, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> 
>> On 2012-03-16 17.49, Bob Eager wrote:
>>
>>> Despite the fact that they have radically different source code and
>>> implementation? I think not.
>> *Yes* Despite different source code. This is not a "bug" in the source
>> code. This is an effect of the semantics of the system. It is this way
>> by design, not accident.
>>
> 
> Is the NFS specification at fault then?  I remember someone here making 
> the comment several years ago that when you dig deep into the NFS RFCs 
> you can find conflicting requirements.
> 

No, it's the humans.

Several years ago I was doing some work for a customer, and they wanted me to use some 
objects that one of their programming staff had worked up.  They were some custom code 
that used the internet to connect with some obscure credit card processor.  So I'm asking 
some questions, concerning timeouts and such.  I tell her, "I've got to handle the case 
where a response never comes back".  Her reply, "You'll always get a response".  When I 
mentioned network failure, she didn't think that ever happened.

Sometimes you just got to say "whatever" and just cash their check.

But in this case her supervisor kindly explained to the programmer (and I use the word 
loosely) that her "perfect world" didn't exist.

My point is, if you are using a network, count on it failing.  If you don't, you will be 
disappointed.  Sort of like being aware that the electrical supply is never guaranteed ...