<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">]>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://lopsa.org">
<channel>
 <title>League of Professional System Administrators - Process</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34/0</link>
 <description>standards dealing with how things are done</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>10 Ultimate Rules for Effective System Administration</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/node/1659</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I saw on one of the news sites (Slashdot or &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;OSN&lt;/span&gt;ews, forget which exactly) a story about the following &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/10-ultimate-rules-for-effective-system-administration.html&quot; title=&quot;reference on 10 Essential Rules for System Administrators&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;10 Essential Rules for System Administrators&lt;/a&gt;.  These are mostly pretty basic and many of them are not really SA specific.  I&#039;m not certain that &quot;backup regularly&quot; and &quot;test your backups regularly&quot; are deserving of being two separate rules; I consider that testing backups is part of the overall backup process.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;One thing I thought was kind of interesting was the timing of this coming out with the number one rule being &quot;Keep it Simple&quot; and my first &lt;i&gt;Black Belt System Administration&lt;/i&gt; topic &lt;a href=&quot;/node/1655&quot; title=&quot;reference on &amp;quot;A punch is just a punch&amp;quot;&quot; target=&quot;_self&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;A punch is just a punch&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;, which is not specifically about system design but about sticking with the basics.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1659&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1659&quot; dc:title=&quot;10 Ultimate Rules for Effective System Administration&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://lopsa.org/trackback/1659&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/24">Operating System</category>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34">Process</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:04:18 -0700</pubDate>
 <author>spp</author>
</item>
<item>
 <title>darcs: a study in communication failure</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/node/1656</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://darcs.org/&quot;&gt;darcs&lt;/a&gt; revision control system has all but lost out to &lt;a href=&quot;http://git.or.cz/&quot;&gt;git&lt;/a&gt; within the past few months.  A rather large part of the reason is a rushed and very poorly worded &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2008-April/041432.html&quot;&gt;release announcement&lt;/a&gt;, following a rather long (I&#039;m told 4 years; I haven&#039;t been aware of it that long, which itself is perhaps ominous) post-1.0 silence from the darcs developers:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1656&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1656&quot; dc:title=&quot;darcs: a study in communication failure&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://lopsa.org/trackback/1656&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34">Process</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 01:12:21 -0700</pubDate>
 <author>allberyb</author>
</item>
<item>
 <title>technical vs. political:  an example of how the world works</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/node/1650</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Even people who are familiar with internal politics may not realize the extent to which technical decision-making can be a distant second, or worse, to political concerns.  An extreme case is &lt;em &gt;real&lt;/em&gt; politics:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1650&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1650&quot; dc:title=&quot;technical vs. political:  an example of how the world works&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://lopsa.org/trackback/1650&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34">Process</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:38:25 -0700</pubDate>
 <author>allberyb</author>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Mixing Multiple Volume Managers (especially ZFS and VxVM)</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/node/1641</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I&#039;ve recently had a number of projects at work that want to mix multiple volume managers on a single server, specifically &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;ZFS &lt;/span&gt;and VxVM for &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;SAN &lt;/span&gt;volumes (actually, three including &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;SVM &lt;/span&gt;for internal boot disk mirroring).  The projects generally are for database servers, and want to use VxVM for database volumes because &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;ZFS &lt;/span&gt;currently has some serious limitation on database size (limited number of devices recommended in a single zpool) and performance (single threaded checksumming, for one).  However, at the same time, they want to have access to some of &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;ZFS&#039;&lt;/span&gt;s features (in particular, the ability to oversubscribe filesystems, dynamic resize, snapshots and rollback) for some of the other filesystems.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1641&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1641&quot; dc:title=&quot;Mixing Multiple Volume Managers (especially ZFS and VxVM)&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://lopsa.org/trackback/1641&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34">Process</category>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/156">Storage</category>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/25">Unix</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:15:13 -0700</pubDate>
 <author>spp</author>
</item>
<item>
 <title>A Narrative View Of The Sysadmin&#039;s Journey: The Motivation</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/node/1301</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
During the recent LoPSA live chat on #lopsa-live it was mentioned that there weren&#039;t enough topics for people to write about on the website and how it was harder for people to come up with an interesting topic than it was to actually write about that. That inspired me to finally draft a proposed series of topics based around the notion of &amp;quot;Scaling Up&amp;quot;; something that’s been bouncing around in my head for a few years.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2&gt;
 Motivation
&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
We spend a lot of effort building and describing tools and techniques - the craft of system administration. A precious few tomes reach beyond the command line to discuss the practice of system administration (I&#039;m thinking specifically of the works of Tom Limoncelli &amp;amp; Christine Hogan.) What I&#039;m searching for is a bridge between the two topics - what you want to eventually achieve and why (practice) and how you can actually achieve that (craft.)
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1301&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/1301&quot; dc:title=&quot;A Narrative View Of The Sysadmin&#039;s Journey: The Motivation&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://lopsa.org/trackback/1301&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34">Process</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:21:21 -0700</pubDate>
 <author>apthorpe</author>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Human monitoring groups</title>
 <link>http://lopsa.org/node/897</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Operations groups I suspect are going to have real problems soon, and not from the usual causes of automation.  It is very common for operations groups to not only monitor the servers, but take on trivial tasks that need to be done out of hours, sometimes even during the business day in an effort to alleve the workload on the system administrator.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Here&#039;s the problem.  Many more systems now store data that may be SOX impacting or some similar law that strictly regulates access.  The system administrators themselves have a strong need to access the box, and usually are a fairly concrete and small team, but operations groups are much larger, maybe even offshored.  I suspect that the access implications have not been fully thought out of giving these groups the access to do some of these root tasks.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/897&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://lopsa.org/node/897&quot; dc:title=&quot;Human monitoring groups&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://lopsa.org/trackback/897&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://lopsa.org/taxonomy/term/34">Process</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2006 04:37:54 -0800</pubDate>
 <author>alcourt</author>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
