Oh FFS! Someone's going to get canned for this.

[minestrone]

The simple truth is, someone ('now removed') turned off the updating after a week.

You cannot unit test for that.

(DBA, dev, tester usual crisis meeting being played out live here)

[eek]

You cannot unit test for that.

(DBA, dev, tester usual crisis meeting being played out live here)

Given a decent database audit trail you could, however, identify the person who switched it off.

Its a user error issue so its going to go down to who do they most dislike. The downside of being a contractor is that you are the easiest to get rid of.

As for the issue with offshore development don't trust them to do anything correctly. insist on seeing the unit tests alongside the code and manually logic test them yourself to find the flaws and gaps. Then hit them with a sledgehammer.

[minestrone]

Given a decent database audit trail you could, however, identify the person who switched it off.

Its a user error issue so its going to go down to who do they most dislike. The downside of being a contractor is that you are the easiest to get rid of.

As for the issue with offshore development don't trust them to do anything correctly. insist on seeing the unit tests alongside the code and manually logic test them yourself to find the flaws and gaps. Then hit them with a sledgehammer.

Someone should have spelling tested that post for you.

It is not admin's fault that got into the DB.

[russell]

Testers, Testers, Testers.

Testers are 100% to blame if a system goes live with defects, or goes live and then fails, they should be testing it after it goes live.

[minestrone]

Testers, Testers, Testers.

Testers are 100% to blame if a system goes live with defects, or goes live and then fails, they should be testing it after it goes live.

You ever worked in a place that has a testing budget for post release?

[d000hg]

Testers, Testers, Testers.

Testers are 100% to blame if a system goes live with defects, or goes live and then fails, they should be testing it after it goes live.

Testers should not be doing tests in the production system though, should they?

The fact it could BE turned off seems weird, but perhaps my imagination of a virtual ON/OFF switch is incorrect and by 'turn off' you mean some configuration was deleted or something?

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

Testers should not be doing tests in the production system though, should they?

The fact it could BE turned off seems weird, but perhaps my imagination of a virtual ON/OFF switch is incorrect and by 'turn off' you mean some configuration was deleted or something?

I agree

it does sound wierd - you can't simply switch off an SCD type 2 - it is either developed or not.

[MarillionFan]

I agree

it does sound wierd - you can't simply switch off an SCD type 2 - it is either developed or not.

Well, according to the developer, in Data Manager someone deactivated SCD on one of the dimensions by unchecking a box.

[eek]

Well, according to the developer, in Data Manager someone deactivated SCD on one of the dimensions by unchecking a box.

Not knowing Cognos why on earth was someone playing with Data Manager on a live system?

[minestrone]

Testers should not be doing tests in the production system though, should they?

I agree, if you test post production the devs probably never got a spec.

Anything post production is not the dev's fault.