RBS 'Computer Glitch'

[scooby]

I'm still failing to understand why this was and is not being backed out? FFS!

[bless 'em all]

I would like to oppose your opinion. In this case Bobs are right – in general under error conditions application should crash. There is nothing worse than application which pretends that everything is fine even if situation is completely screwed up and in worst case even swallows exceptions. If you can ignore error, that should be specified if it is not – application should fail. As example if it is noisy input channel, which sometimes has so mistakes in data, it is ok ignore them, but even in that case you shouldn’t just catch all errors and pretend that everything is fine, but look for specific exception.

No. Error to log. Continue BATCH processing.

[EternalOptimist]

I would like to oppose your opinion. In this case Bobs are right – in general under error conditions application should crash. There is nothing worse than application which pretends that everything is fine even if situation is completely screwed up and in worst case even swallows exceptions. If you can ignore error, that should be specified if it is not – application should fail. As example if it is noisy input channel, which sometimes has so mistakes in data, it is ok ignore them, but even in that case you shouldn’t just catch all errors and pretend that everything is fine, but look for specific exception.

Cobblers.

If it's a batch, log the error , abort that transaction, move on to the next.
If it's an interface, log the error, let the users know, back out to the previous screen, or leave them there if it's recoverable(i.e. a known type of error).

[aussielong]

I'm still failing to understand why this was and is not being backed out? FFS!

They must have gone past the point where rollback was a way out. If the screwed system is feeding the GL and probably other systems too (credit,etc), even if you back out the change your downstream systems are now wrong. You might have to halt further downstream processing if it depends on data that is wrong. First you must sort out the mess in the data, fix or backout the error, then turn on all the taps again.

[EternalOptimist]

They must have gone past the point where rollback was a way out. If the screwed system is feeding the GL and probably other systems too (credit,etc), even if you back out the change your downstream systems are now wrong. You might have to halt further downstream processing if it depends on data that is wrong. First you must sort out the mess in the data, fix or backout the error, then turn on all the taps again.

agreed
rolling back the database and applying the transaction log fixes the database. But anything further down stays busted.

[scooby]

They must have gone past the point where rollback was a way out. If the screwed system is feeding the GL and probably other systems too (credit,etc), even if you back out the change your downstream systems are now wrong. You might have to halt further downstream processing if it depends on data that is wrong. First you must sort out the mess in the data, fix or backout the error, then turn on all the taps again.

Makes sense, top response!

[mudskipper]

So is RBS any different to any other bank? i.e. could this have happened anywhere?

[scooby]

i.e. can this happened anywhere?

FTFY

[EternalOptimist]

So is RBS any different to any other bank? i.e. could this have happened anywhere?

let me ask you the same question, in a different way.


Why aren't Indian banks falling over all the time ?

[mudskipper]

let me ask you the same question, in a different way.


Why aren't Indian banks falling over all the time ?

Do we know they're not?

Assuming they're not, presumably because IT is managed locally with experienced staff who understand the systems and the complexities of the interrelationships.

So have all/most UK banks gone down the mass offshoring route? Those who are threatening to move accounts - what makes you think your new bank isn't just an update away from a similar problem?