Minutes of Systems Criteria Working Group meeting
Date: July 13, 2000
Present: Jeffrey Barnett (Chair), Tom Hyry, Ernie Marinko, Anthony Melillo,
James Shetler (recording)
Absent: Daniel Chudnov, David Gewirtz
- Jeffrey reported that Audrey Novak recently stated that of all the Criteria Work Groups the Systems Criteria Work Group is the closest to the completion of its charge. However, Jeffrey noted that there is still significant work to be done.
Reports on the ALA annual conference
- Jeffrey summarized his experiences at the conference. He attended technical meetings with each of the four vendors (Innovative Interfaces, SIRSI, Endeavor, and Ex Libris).
- Jeffrey elaborated on his meeting with representatives from Ex Libris. Jeffrey noted that this conversation focused on scalability. He also noted that Harvard, the Florida State University Consortia and the California Digital Library were all present, and at present, considering migrating to the Ex Libris system.
- At ALA large blocks of time were spent characterizing system performance. Two ways of viewing such performance were specified: individual transactions versus simultaneous processes. Jeffrey noted that one of the tasks of our group is to flesh out specific system performance in our documentation. For example, can vendors provide us with the specifics of how much system degradation will occur during batch processing while simultaneously providing for individual transactions?
- Another area that requires greater specificity is the amount of time necessary to recover the database.
- An additional area concerns the behavior of a test system. Ideally we should be able to maintain both a production and test region simultaneously (as we now do).
- Jeffrey stressed that it is incumbent on the Work Group to either create new documentation or beef up existing documentation before the expiration of our charge.
- Another question asked at ALA was which vendors are, or will be, ISO9000 compliant. Jeffrey noted that, at present, only two are moving in that direction. Discussion then followed on whether or not this particular criterion is critical or merely important.
- A conversation ensued on how soon before the "go live" date the database be up and running. The preferred window for a stable hardware configuration is three to six months prior to that date.
- Jeffrey reported on his conversations with Ex Libris on the issue of COBOL support.
- Another area where criteria specificity is crucial is vendor support. For example, is there 24 hour support? On-site support? Etc.
- Jeffrey again noted that the Work Group still has a lot of work to complete before the completion of our charge. Each sub group, in particular was charged to re-read and update their sections, with emphasis on adding specific objectives justifying the ranking of each criteria. We are at a point where editing of existing documentation can occur. How best to do so was discussed, and the consensus was to move to circulation of the document in Word format, with Jeffrey consolidating changes.
- The meeting was adjourned.