Comment On ITAPPMONROBOT

At the turn of the 21st century, Initrode Global's server infrastructure began showing cracks. Anyone that had been in the server room could immediately tell that its growth had been organic. Rackmounted servers sat next to recommissioned workstations, with cables barely secured by cable ties. Clearly there had been some effort to clean things up a bit, but whoever put forth that effort gave up halfway through. [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4Next »

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:05 • by operagost
I hear it's now known as ITCUPHOLDERROBOT

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:06 • by yet another Matt
I loved that story. I feel sorry for the poor machine in the corner tirelessly doing it's job. I want to give it a nice home.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:06 • by Domo Arigato (unregistered)
Wouldn't a UPS controlled by the 2nd machine have beeen easier? Just cycle it when the machine stopped responding.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:08 • by Kismet (unregistered)
ASIMO, is that you?

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:11 • by MacGyver (unregistered)
Awww, come-on guys, this is not a WTF! This is classic seat of the pants make the best of a bad situation with some techie innovation.

Sure there's some WTF'ery going on in a business that forces one into this type of situation but the "robot" itself is genious.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:13 • by M (unregistered)
Isn't this the plot to Ai?

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:13 • by Trishan (unregistered)
Somehow, I feel sorry for the poor little admin-robot...

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:14 • by manicsquirrel (unregistered)
I couldn't help but laugh out loud. I've often thought of doing the exact same thing.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:14 • by Malveux (unregistered)
167344 in reply to 167338
You're assuming there was a UPS, let alone one that had some sort of management(be it IP or Serial).

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:16 • by Martin (unregistered)
167345 in reply to 167340
MacGyver:
Awww, come-on guys, this is not a WTF! This is classic seat of the pants make the best of a bad situation with some techie innovation.

Sure there's some WTF'ery going on in a business that forces one into this type of situation but the "robot" itself is genious.


I agree. All I could think after reading the article was "this guy is a genious!". I mean, who woulkd have thought of a better solution, considering the budget freeze and all that stuff?

Genious, I tell you!!

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:17 • by dom (unregistered)
167346 in reply to 167338
two words: budget freeze.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:18 • by MAV (unregistered)
haha, hilarious.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:18 • by Zylon
167348 in reply to 167345
Martin:
Genious, I tell you!!

All things considered, I'd rather you tell us that without the consistent misspelling.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:20 • by Aaron (unregistered)
It's really fortunate that the server managed to survive being continually rebooted.

Erik might have had his head handed to him if his solution had accelerated the death of the original machine.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:24 • by Morty (unregistered)
167350 in reply to 167340
MacGyver:
Awww, come-on guys, this is not a WTF! This is classic seat of the pants make the best of a bad situation with some techie innovation.


Amen. The situation is a WTF, but the solution is a brilliant hack, and not in the Paula Bean sense. He reused old hardware to create a workaround. It was better than what they had before. No budget was spent. Brilliant!

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:25 • by Me (unregistered)
Actually, I did the same thing back in 2001ish using one Linux server to keep another up. The positioning was the hardest thing.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:26 • by Kinglink (unregistered)
Budget freeze, and IT don't mix. Ever.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:27 • by Pope (unregistered)
167353 in reply to 167348
Zylon:
Martin:
Genious, I tell you!!

All things considered, I'd rather you tell us that without the consistent misspelling.


I think there is irony involved... which is genus!

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:28 • by gabba
The story stops before we find out who got credit for this "genious" solution. Probably Laura.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:28 • by Erik (unregistered)
167355 in reply to 167349
Aaron:
It's really fortunate that the server managed to survive being continually rebooted.

Erik might have had his head handed to him if his solution had accelerated the death of the original machine.


Why? The only solution was (apparently) to reboot the machine. The only amount of time that machine death was shortened by was the amount of time it takes to drive to the datacenter and reboot the machine manually when it dies in the middle of the night.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:29 • by Pink Duck (unregistered)
So the replacement server was also faulty, causing the bot to eject its CD drawer for its last two weeks?

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:31 • by Dave (unregistered)
Many of you feel sorry for this server. That is because you are crazy! It has no feelings, and the new one is much better.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yx43NJVYBg8

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:31 • by Tim B (unregistered)
I haven't felt this bad for a robot since I saw A.I.!

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:32 • by Jimboooo! (unregistered)
Did that last bit make anyone else feel a bit sad?

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:32 • by Genie Us (unregistered)
What an ingenius idea.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:32 • by mallard
167362 in reply to 167356
Pink Duck:
So the replacement server was also faulty, causing the bot to eject its CD drawer for its last two weeks?


It probably got a new DNS and/or IP address, so the ping no longer worked.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:33 • by Thief^
167363 in reply to 167356
Pink Duck:
So the replacement server was also faulty, causing the bot to eject its CD drawer for its last two weeks?


It had a different IP to the old one, so any pings the robot sent to the old machine failed, so it tried to reboot it...

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:34 • by Erik (unregistered)
167364 in reply to 167362
mallard:
Pink Duck:
So the replacement server was also faulty, causing the bot to eject its CD drawer for its last two weeks?


It probably got a new DNS and/or IP address, so the ping no longer worked.


Or more likely, it wasn't connected to the network anymore.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:36 • by Josh (unregistered)
Did anyone else read the title as IT Tampon Robot? I thought this story was going to take a HUGE twist.

Damn dyslexia.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:37 • by Walter (unregistered)
I don't see what's so unusual about this really... I've revived plenty of crashed servers with a remote reboot. It's a cute hack though.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:38 • by Marc (unregistered)
CAPTCHA Test (Required For Anonymous Users)
Prove that you're not a robot. Type in the word you see in the image.


God damn it, I almost finished making my TDWTFROBOT to hit the submit button. So long, friend.

/recommissions robot to footrest
//it's better this way

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:39 • by Zygo (unregistered)
167368 in reply to 167338
Domo Arigato:
Wouldn't a UPS controlled by the 2nd machine have beeen easier? Just cycle it when the machine stopped responding.


It's also a good diagnostic tool--the weakest component will fail first, and much more quickly, if you're power-cycling the machine 10 times a day.

Mind you all my critical servers are set up this way (a ring o' UPSes, where machine N's USB port controls machine ((N+1) mod M)'s UPS)--although the monitor script will refuse to power-cycle a given machine more than once every 12 hours. If it doesn't come back up the first try, I want someone to check out the hardware just in case magic smoke is leaking out of something.

I used to build a circuit with a 555 timer, a 74LS00 and a couple of 74LS191's which would count very slowly to 16 (it took about 4 minutes) but would reset the counter to zero every time the hard disk light blinked. The "overflow" output pin on the 4-bit counters was connected to the RESET signal on the motherboard. No disk activity for 4 minutes and the machine gets reset. With an appropriate interface chip the serial port could be monitored too (I used to need this when I ran a BBS).

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:46 • by John (unregistered)
167372 in reply to 167338

Wouldn't a UPS controlled by the 2nd machine have beeen easier? Just cycle it when the machine stopped responding.

You're assuming they had a UPS.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 11:48 • by John (unregistered)
167373 in reply to 167372
John:

Wouldn't a UPS controlled by the 2nd machine have beeen easier? Just cycle it when the machine stopped responding.

You're assuming they had a UPS.



Someone already said this. Apologies, my mistake.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:02 • by Adam (unregistered)
That is so sad... It reminds me of when Dewey was left to take care of the forest on his own at the end of Silent running.

With a buckled watering can.

Sob...

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:05 • by ITAPPMONROBOT (unregistered)
167380 in reply to 167350
I agree this was brilliant. UPC costs money and unless the BIOS is a relatively new one, the server will still require manual intervention after the UPC kicks in.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:09 • by Marc (unregistered)
167381 in reply to 167365
Bloody hell!

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:12 • by Gilgamesh (unregistered)
man, that ending was poetic! loved it! a bit sad, but great... :)

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:17 • by Guesser (unregistered)
167384 in reply to 167338
a much less crude solution would just be a relay or a transistor switch across the reset button leads, stuck on the other machine's serial port...

it's not that WTFey though... everything related to my webserver and things works in similar bodged ways to this. why buy something hi tech and purpose built, when an old machine bodged together can limp along just fine (most of the time)? ;)

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:34 • by Bombe
167388 in reply to 167360
It sure did make me shed a tear.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:35 • by AW (unregistered)
Best. WTF. Ever.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:41 • by belzebuth
I didn't know you could do that !

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:45 • by brazzy
167392 in reply to 167379


Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:52 • by David (unregistered)
167393 in reply to 167350
Either way, WTF or brilliant hack, it *is* a curious perversion in information technology.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 12:55 • by D. T. North (unregistered)
167394 in reply to 167338
Domo Arigato:
Wouldn't a UPS controlled by the 2nd machine have beeen easier? Just cycle it when the machine stopped responding.


Wouldn't that cause havoc on the filesystem? I'm assuming this is a unix-like system and the reset button triggers a 'shutdown -r now' command, which at least unmounts the hard drives before rebooting. Power cycling the PC wouldn't unmount them, and I imagine it would eventually corrupt the system.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 13:00 • by Richard Sargent (unregistered)
I am surprised no one commented on the WTF of an undocumented server. If Erik had documented its purpose, there is a chance someone might have read the documentation when they went to move the monitoring server and realized it was no longer needed. Note: I said "a chance"! :-)

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 13:08 • by brazzy
167396 in reply to 167394
D. T. North:
Domo Arigato:
Wouldn't a UPS controlled by the 2nd machine have beeen easier? Just cycle it when the machine stopped responding.


Wouldn't that cause havoc on the filesystem? I'm assuming this is a unix-like system and the reset button triggers a 'shutdown -r now' command, which at least unmounts the hard drives before rebooting. Power cycling the PC wouldn't unmount them, and I imagine it would eventually corrupt the system.

I'd assume the server's OS was completely frozen. Otherwise, the best solution would be to run the watchdog script on the server itselt.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 13:08 • by Demaestro (unregistered)
That is just good innovation.

I mean really... if it worked even for a month or two.. or even if it saved him from coming in at 2:00am once or twice it would be worth it.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 13:12 • by BobPaul (unregistered)
167398 in reply to 167338
Most UPSs don't give you that kind of control. Generally a UPS only tells you its status so that you're computer can say, "Shit! I only have 5 minutes of battery left? Better shut down saftely!" You can't normally say, "You know what? Kill the power to call connected devices" because manufacturers assume one of the connected devices is the one issuing the command.

Re: ITAPPMONROBOT

2007-12-18 13:14 • by Daniel (unregistered)
Bwah, automated kittyfeeders with the help of mount & ubuntu been around for ages; http://www.leeholmes.com/blog/DIYCatFeederAndWaterDispenser.aspx

I actually kinda like the solution - a clever hack imho. Not clean nor Enterprisey enough, but still pretty clever.
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4Next »

Add Comment