Elections, for Profit
Glenn forwarded this around at work. By way of an explanation for the extensive problems with electronic voting in Denver during the last election, this is priceless:
Many flaws were found in the way the system used its resources in a way that severely limited the number and efficiency of users. When someone logs on, the system would create a 'session' for them. If they left using the special 'log off' button, then the program responded reasonably. If the user exited another way, such as closing the window using the red 'X' button at the top of the screen, then the session would never close and return the resources to the other users.
When asked why they did not have a timer that automatically closed out any users who sat idle for hours, Sequoia reported that they were not requested to do so. Hessler joked that this was like saying that nobody had told them to make the software run on computers, so they decided it didn't need to.
Rather than open a connection to the database at the start of a search and close it at the end of the search, the connection to the database is opened at the log in screen, even before the user has logged in to the system, and it requests a list of Denver street names and a list of valid identification methods, "not once but twice, to no apparent purpose."
After this it opens a connection for the user when they log in, and leaves that connection open until they exit the system using the correct button, or never if they just click the 'x'.
On their first stress test using 100 simultaneous users, the system ground to a halt.
I love this: web based software that doesn't time out sessions, leaves a database connection open for the duration of the session, and can't support more than 100 simultaneous users. I wish that I could find out more about how exactly Sequoia managed to create such a colossal failure of a software project. According to the city council's minutes (page 6): "Sequoia Systems were problematic in other places, not just Denver; also according to the Fujitsu consultant the system failed programming 101; the city should not really (sic) on a for profit company for elections systems." Did you get that last part? The city should not rely on a for-profit company for elections systems.
The irony, of course, is that Denver is now faced with holding a special election to determine what to do about the Denver Election Commission.