How come....
...whenever the IT manager says to the tech guys "How many servers will we need to handle this system/game?" And the tech guys say "Oh five should do it!" That they haven't learned by now to quadruple whatever figure they say.
Registration to vote in the UK's EU referendum has been extended until midnight June 9 after No. 10's voter registration web site crashed. Legislation is being introduced to the House of Commons to extend the deadline for those wishing to register to vote in this month's referendum, minister for the Cabinet Office and …
but the MD or bean counters say "That's too expensive, we'll manage with 2"
Yes they'll have started with 2, but then the techies in the know (i.e. not the PHBs) will have realised how inadequate this is and will have surrepticiously aquired:-
1) The Project Server that GDS is supposed to use to keep work delivery on schedule but no-one knows is there.
2) The Sharepoint cluster that the Department of Health is supposed to use for secure document storage, but which doesn't get used because Betty in admin has lost the post-it note with the password on it.
3) The fancy SQL Server clusters with full replication that were recommended by some smarmy consultant, which were supposed to be used by the Inland Revenue collections department, but which aren't in use because they ran out of budget before the front end was developed.
Result - 10 shiny new servers. Wipe all, install Windows Server 2012 / IIS / SQL Server, take one look at the GUI, scream, wipe all again, install Redhat / LAMP stack, all clustered together, running nicely with maximum resource load a whisker under 30%. Luverly.
It was all going so well until...
June 7th 21:40 - BOFH has had enough of watching Farage and Cameron, or anyone else for that matter, talking utter bollocks about the referendum and decides that drastic action is required. He casually drops 8 servers out of the cluster, turns off the lights, and whistling happily to himself, heads down the pub for a well deserved pint or 3 as the meltdown begins...
Result - 10 shiny new servers. Wipe all, install Windows Server 2012 / IIS / SQL Server, take one look at the GUI, scream, wipe all again, install Redhat / LAMP stack, all clustered together, running nicely with maximum resource load a whisker under 30%. Luverly.
That's actually the real problem. When New Labour came in, they started a love affair with Microsoft and that infection of consulting-money driven idiocy has still not left the government despite some small wins like making ODF the default doc format (which, incidentally, resulted in a wholesale change of nothing whatsoever due to just how deep Microsoft has its claws in the system).
The problem is that with Microsoft comes a default acceptance that you need a shedload of resources to keep things running, so the inevitable excuse is always resource shortages rather than resource waste by an OS that has no business being used at the industrial levers you need for government. Microsoft servers generally don't unless you throw at least twice as many resources at it that you need for any form of Unix - why do you think the big boys such as Google, Amazon et al run Linux derivatives?
A pity that whilst Corbyn can pontificate about registering to vote he can't seem to be bothered to vote himself on something as important as the IP Bill.
Why is that?
This post has been deleted by its author
@Symon
It is called 'pairing'. The advice to every new MP is to grow a pair (or whatever, depending on sex).
So the PM is paired with the leader of the opposition and so on all the way down; as a result they don't have to be bothered with minor votes.
The ones who get left out are the newest MPs in the governing party. It is not surprising that sometimes they feel rebellious. The junior opposition MPs have great fun choosing who will be their pair.
This post has been deleted by its author
I wouldn't necessarily take the list of people who didn't vote as a cast iron sign of their support or otherwise because there is an agreement called pairing. This is where if an MP on one side is absent then an opposition MP will step aside and not vote to balance things out. http://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/pairing/
That only works in cases where the total number of MPs in one party match the numbers in the other. Otherwise it can skew the results.
Pairing isn't an excuse IMO: it's just a way of abdicating responsibility whilst maintaining a veneer of acceptability at the same time.
Pairing should be banned. And Corbyn should be ashamed of himself if this is why he didn't turn up.
This post has been deleted by its author
One part of me says sod those who left it until 10pm or later yesterday - we've known for months there's going to be a referendum, and the voter registration site has been up for even longer, so if you're really interested in voting, you've had plenty of time already.
The other side of me says it's human nature to leave things to the last minute (how many people file their tax returns in the last hours of Jan 31st every year?), and the government should have specified the servers could be capable of handing the expected last minute surge.
I'm in the 'sod them' camp. They've had plenty of time to register to vote, and there is a legally defined registration limit whatever the quality of the online registration process. I'm a bit more sympathetic to voting after the 10pm limit on polling day, if you have already joined the queue before 10pm.
me to. Got my postal vote organised a month ago when I realised I was going to be away on the 23rd. Posted the Vote off last week (voted to stay BTW) We get the same thing where I work. Boffin going away on research cruise, container due to be packed and shipped Friday, when do they show up to ask for IT equipment, that'll be Thursday lunchtime then. Deadline for submitting that big grant proposal application 4pm, when are they desperately trying to get it submitted during an JANET DDNS attack 345PM
How some of these people manage to find their own way home baffles me at times!
"No, voter reg is open all year round so more like PAYE and not a window in time as with tax returns."
On line tax returns (at least UK ones) aren't a 'window in time' either - for the due year you can submit them pretty much any time without penalty until 31 Jan, and pretty much any time after 31 Jan with a penalty.
The thing is.... this wasn't an advertised meat sale.
(So you turn up, late Saturday afternoon, and all the cheap meat has gone)
The date and time was set... where a person could register to vote.
It wasn't stated with the caution, that 'if you turn up backendish you might not be able to register'.
Add to that, the fact that the final dash to register, was always going to happen.
.... then factor in the technical capabilities that the government could bring to bear on managing this registration system...
What we get is a pure and simple failure to provide the correct systems.
It's no good blaming people for behaving like people, when dealing with the mass of general public.
This is what governing people is all about.
So who's fault is it?
It's probably down to the Civil Servants.
They are employed to implement the will of the government.
We can be sure that they are now developing complex excuses.
It's not even beyond reason that they are turning the failure to their advantage, to gain an increase in their IT budget.
Every cloud has a silver lining.
"It wasn't stated with the caution, that 'if you turn up backendish you might not be able to register'."
Actually it was.
"... the commission is warning millions of unregistered voters not to leave it too late as no application will be accepted beyond the deadline."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/07/surge-in-voter-registrations-expected-before-eu-referendum-deadline
Presumably the service was set up in expectation of a certain demand.
That a lot of people decided at the last minute (almost literally) to register, when the portal had been available for weeks, and publicised as such, is unfortunate but was it predictable?
If you are of a suspicious mind, you could conceive that as the recent surge in registration was among younger voters, who are predicted to be more Remain than Leave, that the 'crash' might have been down to Brexiteers trying to overload system and thus gerrymander the outcome.
More likely, BRemainers *who own the server* took it briefly offline, so that in case the referendum gave the wrong result, it could be challenged. The UK will be asked to vote again until we give the right result.
Here is a list of EU referendums, and their results:
European Constitution:
No: France (55%), Netherlands (62%)
Cancelled: Czech Republic, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, UK, Denmark
Yes: Lux (57%), Spain (77%)
Every one of the Constitutions actionable provisions has now been passed into law separately.
Ireland rejected the treaty of Lisbon, 53.4% in 2008. So they were required to vote again on 2009, and duly gave the required answer (67.1%)
Greek citizens voted clearly to exit the EU, and that was ignored.
The UK will simply be asked to continue voting until they give the right answer.
Fanciful. But we will see a real effort to game the postal vote with immigration arguments in 'mixed heritage' communities and Remain doing nothing about it.
For the preservation of democracy, if a constituency postal vote differs from the ballot box by a statistically significant amount it should be considered potentially fraudulent and investigated and the vote suspended if it materially effects the results. Yeah, ain't gonna happen.
Please let me think hard about this... OK, having consulted my extensive experience and know-how, it's because too many people, all at once, wanted to register by deadline. Think leaves on the railway track, snow in winter, online tax returns,etc. These are ALWAYS totally unexpected.
p.s. I prefer my £1M consultancy fee as a check, rather than bank transfer and it's got nothing to do with my unwavering faith in NatWest banking system.
If they had a half-decent load-balancer in front of the servers then huge demand shouldn't cause a problem.
Some people would be told 'we're a bit busy - keep trying' but it shouldn't actually break the site.
Please, someone, tell me they weren't running a single web server with no load control mechanism*!!
*I mean, if you know that is - don't just make it up :P
So the site failed with and hour and a half to go before the deadline because loads of people suddenly tried to register to vote.
And then people complain.
Really?
Look guys, It's the most important decision we're going to make in a generation, and you've had months and months of build-up.
Given that, why did you leave it it till 10:30pm on the last possible day to finally decide to register to vote? Was that really sensible? What does it say about how much you actually care about the issues you'll be voting on?
Pardon me if I don't have any sympathy for you if the site happened to be down at the time. You had plenty of time to do it.
I have more sympathy for the site administrators who probably had a wretched night trying their best to keep the thing up and running for those last few hours, just to support a bunch of lazy muppets who couldn't be bothered to spend five minutes visiting the site at any time during the preceding months.