Liste des Groupes | Revenir à col misc |
c186282 wrote:In a word, "very".
Oh, I agree ... trying to "rapidly rebuild" the "Just Works"Sorry for my below naive/stupid questions...
code-base is VERY risky. As said, most of those old COBOL
apps on those old computers were basically PERFECT - and
the fallout from being IMperfect is SEVERE - both politically
and per-individual affected. Extreme caution is advised.
How hard could SS be?
Are the rules so complex?In snapshot form, not too terribly bad. Problem is that there's been 50+ years worth of revisions, and the documentation of every change is never 100.0000% perfect in every last detail.
I know it's hundredsIt is "big iron" mainframe stuff. Think of a single data center having literally *rows* of IBM 360's/370's.
of millions of people, but that doesn't seen a huge challenge for
modern systems. I don't know why it would be any harder than any
"significant" piece of software, like spreadsheet or database
software.
I'm also wondering how large the code base could be, if it was writtenYup. A system my wife worked on back in the 1990s for Y2K had literally a couple of **Pentabytes** of data storage being managed by their COBOL system. I doubt it has grown by all that much .. my guess is that they're probably still under ~50 Pentabytes today.
fifty years ago when a megabyte was a huge amount of memory.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.