Re: Is perfection attainable?

Phil Singer <psinger1_at_chartermi.invalid> wrote in message news:<3F290FCB.3080109_at_chartermi.invalid>...

>
> The networking group has also claimed that they are innocient.

Well, that alone indicates guilt! :-)

As if they know no giant undersea monsters aren't chewing on the cable, or the cable doesn't have to share with anything else.

>
> The vendor for the client hardware (and the switchbox, cable, and NIC
> have already been swapped out "just in case") says there is no problem
> there.
>
> Office politics decree that the fault cannot lie in the client software.

Well, let the politicians fix it! :-)

>
> We are getting one failure per 200,000 connections, on an unpredictable
> basis (about 5/week). We could live with that if the client application
> was modified to handle these errors more politely (it currently goes
> into crisis mode and assumes the database server has crashed). I think
> I can get management to O.K. doing this if I can convince them that
> networks just can't get more reliable than this. And this is what I
> am trolling for. And I am doing it here because (as a long time
> lurker, rare poster) I respect the collective wisdom of this group.

Seconding what Billy said, any network app or airplane has to gracefully handle clouds with mountains in them. Politics or no.

>
> Sybrand, if this makes you curse, I can read German.

LOL! jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.edge.org/archive.html