• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Spreadsheet error resulted in missing Sars-Cov-2 cases for track and trace

Status
Not open for further replies.

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,042
Location
Taunton or Kent
Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...eath-rates-and-a-possible-second-wave.208012/


Some credit to the BBC this time I think for actually headlining the error rather than scaremongering the daily increase number:


Nearly 16,000 cases of coronavirus were not entered into the national computer system used for official figures because of a technical glitch, Public Health England says.

Some of the unreported cases were added to Saturday's figure of 12,872 new cases and Sunday's figure of 22,961.

It said all of these cases "received their Covid-19 test result as normal".

But BBC Health Editor Hugh Pym said it meant the contacts of those who tested positive had not been approached.

Public Health England said the cases were missed off daily reports between 25 September and 2 October.

A note on the government's coronavirus dashboard said: "The cases by publish date for 3 and 4 October include 15,841 additional cases with specimen dates between 25 September and 2 October - they are therefore artificially high for England and the UK."

There are also people from my Twitter feed who are not pointing out the sudden increase either as much as the implications this has for our already disastrous Test and Trace programme.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
Perhaps they where using an old version of Excel. The older versions I seem to remember only allowed 65,000 rows.

This article gives some more detail about the problems with Excel.

As a former Software Tester, I have to say I am not surprised.

When designing a database, you have to think about whether the software you use can handle the volumes of data, particularly if the volume of data is expected to grow over time. Excel was designed primarily for personal and small businesses, and is not suitable for large scale data collection exercises such as this. (in my opinion at least)



A technical error with an Excel spreadsheet is believed to have caused 16,000 cases of coronavirus to be missed from national tallies, causing a "shambolic" delay to tracing efforts.
The issue occurred between September 25 and October 2 when testing data failed to transfer from the labs to the dashboards that report the numbers.
Although the original numbers suggested the UK's coronavirus cases were beginning to plateau, the missing cases instead confirmed the country's number of positive test results is still on an upward trajectory.
The error meant on September 30, although the official daily tally showed 7,109 positive results, the total should have been 3,049 higher. On October 1 the total number of missing cases climbed to 4,133 and, on October 2, that number was even higher, at 4,786.
These 16,000 missing coronavirus extra cases have now been added to the official count. Although Public Health England said everyone who tested positive was informed in the normal way, those who came into contact with them were not.

Instead their details were passed to official contact tracers after the error was discovered, at 1am on Saturday, leaving the test and trace system facing a giant backlog of cases.
What caused the IT error?
Public Health England's interim chief executive Michael Brodie blamed the error on a "technical issue", which he said was identified overnight on Friday, 2 October.
However, a report by PA suggests the fiasco was due to an Excel file containing lab results reaching its maximum file size, which stopped new names being added in an automated process.
The files have now been split into smaller multiple files to prevent the issue happening again, the report claims.
Matthew Parker, a mathematician and author of Humble Pi, tweeted:

"It sounds like there was an arbitrary cut-off point for files on the system," said Michael Veale, Lecturer in Digital Rights & Regulation at University of College London.
"It could’ve been, for example, that it did not accept spreadsheets that had a large number of rows.
“While these kinds of errors can happen, data entry procedures should have checks to ensure that they don’t, or provide feedback to those uploading files that they have been truncated. Those are common practices in industry and it would be surprising if they were not present here."
Public Health England is yet to respond to queries about the nature of the glitch and what type of system it was using.
A note on the Government's coronavirus data dashboard says that the issue has been "resolved" and PHE has said that "further robust measures have been put in place as a result".
Could it have been prevented?
Although Public Health England has been keen to brand the problem as a "technical issue", experts say the problem is more likely to be linked to human error.
Technology strategist and consultant Rachel Coldicutt told the Telegraph: "I think it shows that data management and collection is subject to very human processes and errors, and that UK government’s capabilities - whether people or infrastructure - is still a long way from being able to drive the “quantitative data revolution” Dominic Cummings is hoping for."

Jon Crowcroft, a Computer Science professor at the University of Cambridge, said: "It seems possible they exceeded the number of things Excel could deal with. If this was the case, it is also remiss of them, as the limits on what Excel can handle are pretty common knowledge and should also be part of any sensible testing.
He added: "When a glitch like this happens in a service, you have to ask what level of professional scrutiny was there over the system design choices and code? it sounds like "not much" would be a fair answer."
What happens now?
Health Secretary Matt Hancock will appear in the Commons this afternoon to make a statement at around 3.30pm.
He is expected to face questions about the government's habit of blaming computers or "mutant algorithms" - in the case of exams results - instead of acknowledging internal mistakes.
Will this have contributed to the spread of the virus?
There is no way of knowing the precise ramifications of the error because of the way the new coronavirus spreads.
Some people are asymptomatic carriers and will be infected without knowing, while others will show symptoms, including a loss or change in sense of smell or taste, a new and persistent cough and a fever; others could be "pre-symptomatic".
One could presume that all of those who become symptomatic immediately begin to self-isolate at home, but the problem lies with those who are infected but are not aware.
This could lead to them continuing their lives as normal in the community and potentially increasing the spread of the virus.
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
9,253
Location
Yorkshire
This article gives some more detail about the problems with Excel.

As a former Software Tester, I have to say I am not surprised.

When designing a database, you have to think about whether the software you use can handle the volumes of data, particularly if the volume of data is expected to grow over time. Excel was designed primarily for personal and small businesses, and is not suitable for large scale data collection exercises such as this. (in my opinion at least)

Holy <insert expletive>!

The mantra of a former colleague (in IT) was that Excel et al are personal productivity tools. Of course, many businesses run their, well, business, on Excel and the like. The fact Serco are doing so is a bit unfrgiveable, really.

Here is a link to a site with similar info that isn't behind a paywall should anyone prefer (I haven't quoted it, as the content will be similar to the Telegraph)
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/missing-c...h-large-excel-spreadsheet-file-095054235.html

There is a Tweet embedded in the article which is somewhat amusing (in a tragic way) from Dr Rosena Allin-Khan
The 'world beating' Serco Test and Trace system is being run on Excel instead of database software - which has caused the latest issues. Next they'll tell us it's run on Windows 95 and they manually back it up on floppy disks each night.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,071
Holy <insert expletive>!

The mantra of a former colleague (in IT) was that Excel et al are personal productivity tools. Of course, many businesses run their, well, business, on Excel and the like. The fact Serco are doing so is a bit unfrgiveable, really.

Here is a link to a site with similar info that isn't behind a paywall should anyone prefer (I haven't quoted it, as the content will be similar to the Telegraph)
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/missing-c...h-large-excel-spreadsheet-file-095054235.html

There is a Tweet embedded in the article which is somewhat amusing (in a tragic way) from Dr Rosena Allin-Khan
A lot of what you pay people like Serco for is the brass neck that lets them half-ass solutions like this. If a public sector body proposed doing it internally somebody would point out that it isn't best-practice. If the external "experts" do it, then it it's best-practice almost by definition
 

87 027

Member
Joined
1 Sep 2010
Messages
699
Location
London
Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/england-wales-tracing-app-to-be-released-sept-24th.209098/

It’s now being reported that the missing cases that were not manually traced were due to a spreadsheet error. Apparently results from the labs were being uploaded into an Excel spreadsheet, but with each new case in columns rather than rows, so the spreadsheet stopped updating once it hit the maximum limit of 16,384 columns. You couldn’t make it up!


When Microsoft created its Excel spreadsheet software it created limits as to just how big a spreadsheet could be.

Specifically, according to Microsoft’s own documentation, they set the following limits:
1,048,576 rows by 16,384 columns
That doesn’t feel daft to me. Why would anyone ever want so many columns on a spreadsheet? The last column is labelled XFD if you’re curious.

And yes, if you think of any spreadsheet you’ve ever used in your working life, you would certainly anticipate that you might need many more rows than you would need columns.

But those are clearly still huge numbers. If you wanted to collect data on anything that came anywhere close to those limits you would probably want to use proper database software, not an Excel speadsheet, right?

Not so, it would seem, when Dido Harding is in charge of the UK’s Test & Trace operation.

Some 16,000 Coronavirus cases reportedly went missing after the Excel spreadsheet they were being recorded in reached its maximum limit, and did not allow the automated process to add any more names.

...

There’s a lesson to be learnt here, and that’s use the right tool for the job. Excel is for spreadsheets, not for running databases.

You’re running a Test & Trace operation, not putting together a wedding present list.

How anyone could imagine that using a spreadsheet with a patient per column was a wise idea is beyond me.

But don’t fear – apparently a solution to the problem was quickly found.

They’ve decided to split it up into multiple Excel spreadsheets
 
Last edited:

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,017
It’s now being reported that the missing cases that were not manually traced were due to a spreadsheet error. Apparently results from the labs were being uploaded into an Excel spreadsheet, but with each new case in columns rather than rows, so the spreadsheet stopped updating once it hit the maximum limit of 16,384 columns. You couldn’t make it up!
Thanks for that. There is an article on The Telegraph website which refers to it being an excel problem, but the detail is (presumably) behind the paywall.
 

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
5,828
Location
Wilmslow
Sky writes this up (https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...testing-blunder-will-likely-prove-it-12090904) as a 65,536-row limit on an old version of Excel at PHE being to blame. £100 would have paid for an upgrade to a newer version without this limit.
ANALYSIS

Coronavirus: Data can save lives, data can cost lives - and this latest testing blunder will likely prove it

Excel is both amazing - and at the same time utterly frustrating and the limitations of the old version meant data got lost.

Ed Conway

Economics editor @EdConwaySky

Monday 5 October 2020 15:06, UK

Data can save lives; data can cost lives.

That might sound a little melodramatic until you recall that it is ultimately the very point of Britain's COVID-19 test and trace strategy.

The sooner we detect the disease and marshal that information to prevent infected people passing COVID on to their contacts, the sooner we can bring this pandemic under control and return to some semblance of normality.

Numbers are what undergird this process. Data on who has the disease, data on their contacts: if we lose control of that data then we have effectively lost control of the coronavirus all over again.

Which is why what happened in the past week with England's COVID-19

testing data is so disturbing.The data on some 16,000 positive cases of this disease were briefly lost and have only belatedly been recovered and passed on to contact tracers.

Some of those infection alerts were delayed by a few days, others by nearly a week.

In a pandemic where every hour counts, that is not far short of a disaster. It makes it highly likely that some of those contacts who were not reached in time will unknowingly have been spreading COVID-19.

It means that in some clusters, the disease was allowed to spread unchecked. It means more people will have caught it; some of those people will probably die.

And all because of an astonishingly elementary spreadsheet mistake at Public Health England (PHE).

Now, if you've spent any time fiddling around with data you've probably spent some time with your nose inside a spreadsheet program like Excel. And as any data nerd will tell you, Excel is both amazing and at the same time utterly frustrating.

It has all sorts of incredible functions which allow you to fiddle and query and visualise data. You can take a table of data and you can very quickly analyse it, turn it upside down, shake it around and work out what's really going on underneath the surface.

It is - and I say this as someone who spends much of his days buried inside it - a thing of wonder.

But like every clever tool, spreadsheet programs like Excel also have a whole host of serious limitations. For instance, up until the most recent versions, there was a somewhat arbitrary limit on the number of rows of data you could import into the programme.

Anything above 65,536 rows and it simply won't work. The latest version of the software raised that limit to a million rows, but many computers - especially the ones inside government offices - are still running the older version.

Anyone working with big databases is well aware of those limitations. It is why they rarely trust Excel for managing big databases, using other dedicated database services instead.

Indeed, PHE has a pretty robust database it has used for years to collate national test results for various diseases.

The problem is while the Second Generation Surveillance System (SGSS), as it's called, is plugged into the existing pathology labs that pre-date COVID- 19, for some reason no-one has yet managed to connect it to the new labs which have been created during the course of this pandemic.

The friction between these two systems - Pillar 1 labs, which constitute the established labs in hospitals around the country, and Pillar 2, which constitute the new centralised mostly privately-run labs created specifically in the face of the disease - is one of the main problems which has bedevilled Britain’s testing system.

This latest data disaster is only the latest episode.

Rather than feeding its results securely straight into SGSS, as Pillar 1 pathology labs do, the test results from Pillar 2 labs arrive at PHE in the form of a CSV file.

CSV, in case you haven't yet encountered it, is about the most basic spreadsheet format that exists, with data separated by commas.

That CSV file is then automatically fed into an Excel template, which then feeds it into the government's testing dashboard.

In data management terms, this is a little like putting together a car with sellotape, for reasons PHE discovered on Friday.

While all the other indicators were suggesting the case numbers in the UK were rising pretty rapidly, the numbers being displayed on the government's dashboard seemed to be stalling, and then falling.

The technicians at PHE opened up the computer doing the Excel conversion and discovered something alarming: it hadn't included all the data from those Pillar 2 labs.

It turns out that as the number of cases mounted the number of rows on the spreadsheet was getting longer and longer and suddenly PHE's version of Excel - which is thought to be the older version - came up against that 65,536 row limit.

Thousands of rows of data - which is to say information on cases - were simply left out.

There are many unsettling things about this but perhaps the most unsettling is that this process - with data sellotaped together - is at the very apex of Britain's COVID-19 management system.

For only after PHE has processed the data is it passed onto the contact tracers who can then get to work trying to isolate those who have been in contact with infected people.

In the event, about 16,000 cases were not processed immediately and were only passed onto contact tracers on Saturday.

According to PHE officials, around 12,000 of them were delayed by only one to three days - but the remaining 4,000 were delayed by as much as a week.

According to insiders, the spreadsheet problem has now been addressed - which is to say they are chopping the incoming CSV files into smaller sizes to allow them to fit into Excel.

At this stage it is perhaps worth underlining that around £12bn has been budgeted for the test and trace system - more than almost any other government investment programme in modern history.

It is double the amount the UK is spending on its two aircraft carriers and equivalent to almost £450 for every household in this country.

Many will ask how so much could have been set aside for this scheme, yet it has been undone by a known issue in a computer program which could have been solved by spending about £100 on an upgrade.

The other consequence of the data revisions is to change our impressions of the spread of the disease. For the national dashboard on which those data are displayed now suddenly looks very different to how it did on Friday.

Here the implications are somewhat less serious, if only because no-one much trusted the daily case figures anyway.

Still: on the basis of this data series which most of us have been treating with a little caution, it does indeed change the picture a bit.

Up until the revisions over the weekend the average daily increase in positive COVID-19 tests (by date of test) was running at just under 5% over the past fortnight.

As of this new data it's running at around 7%.

That might not sound like much of a difference - and be assured it's still a long way shy of the 10% plus growth rate (the equivalent of cases doubling every seven days) Sir Patrick Vallance warned of a couple of weeks ago.

Even so, it makes for uncomfortable reading.

It means, for instance, that when you compare the UK to the French and Spanish trajectories for the disease, the UK goes from being below their lines - in other words having a less severe outbreak - to being above their lines.

But most people pay more attention to other measures such as the Office for National Statistics survey of the infection and hospital admissions.

And on the basis of these measures the picture remains as it did before the weekend: the disease is spreading but the spread looks less rapid than it did a few weeks ago.

Even so, the great worry about this episode is not only that it harms faith in the system designed to protect us from the disease; it has already allowed more people to be infected.

And all because no-one paid enough attention to the data.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,017
See also this article:


When Microsoft created its Excel spreadsheet software it created limits as to just how big a spreadsheet could be.

Specifically, according to Microsoft’s own documentation, they set the following limits:

That doesn’t feel daft to me. Why would anyone ever want so many columns on a spreadsheet? The last column is labelled XFD if you’re curious.

And yes, if you think of any spreadsheet you’ve ever used in your working life, you would certainly anticipate that you might need many more rows than you would need columns.

But those are clearly still huge numbers. If you wanted to collect data on anything that came anywhere close to those limits you would probably want to use proper database software, not an Excel speadsheet, right?

Not so, it would seem, when Dido Harding is in charge of the UK’s Test & Trace operation.

Some 16,000 Coronavirus cases reportedly went missing after the Excel spreadsheet they were being recorded in reached its maximum limit, and did not allow the automated process to add any more names.

...

There’s a lesson to be learnt here, and that’s use the right tool for the job. Excel is for spreadsheets, not for running databases.

You’re running a Test & Trace operation, not putting together a wedding present list.

How anyone could imagine that using a spreadsheet with a patient per column was a wise idea is beyond me.

But don’t fear – apparently a solution to the problem was quickly found.

They’ve decided to split it up into multiple Excel spreadsheets…
But, not all versions of Microsoft Office come with Access. I have the 'one-off purchase' variety and don't have Access. One would hope that large organisations, with proper IT support, have full supported version. But you never know!

Given cutbacks in the public sector, at least they are on the latest version of Excel. My previous version (Office XP, used until 2018 and I was perfectly happy with it) had far fewer rows (and perhaps columns).

It's one way to keep the numbers down though, just like 'if you don't test, you don't find'.

EDIT @jfollows seems to have identified that old software, may indeed, have been the problem. Pennywise, pound foolish. Ha'peth of tar to spoil the ship etc.

If you want world class, it costs money, not just BS and soundbites to the fawning TV journo's.

On the basis of the Sky News article alone, I have added them to my browser bookmarks.
 
Last edited:

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
The 'world beating' Serco Test and Trace system is being run on Excel instead of database software - which has caused the latest issues. Next they'll tell us it's run on Windows 95 and they manually back it up on floppy disks each night.

Of course not, you don't imagine that Serco actually back up the data every night.

Probably only once a week, as anything more frequent is not "cost effective".
 

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
5,828
Location
Wilmslow
I just can not imagine, as an IT professional of many years' standing, why anyone would conceive of using Excel with CSV input as a robust method of data gathering and storage. At the very least, if forced to use these horrible methods, I'd implement some basic checks and balances such as counting the number of input lines and comparing these with the Excel number of lines. Wisdom of hindsight? Perhaps. Basic competence? For sure. World-beating? Not under any circumstances.

I think the fact that these people are relying on Excel to be the basis for their implementation of a track/trace tool is disgusting and incompetent beyond belief. I just don't think that any competent person would consider it.
 
Last edited:

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,534
Sorry to burst everyone’s Serco hating bubble but it was PHE, not Serco, according to this...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54422505
And it sounds utterly schoolboy error level

The BBC has confirmed the missing Covid-19 test data was caused by the ill-thought-out use of Microsoft's Excel software. Furthermore, PHE was to blame, rather than a third-party contractor.

The issue was caused by the way the agency brought together logs produced by the commercial firms paid to carry out swab tests for the virus.

They filed their results in the form of text-based lists, without issue.

PHE had set up an automatic process to pull this data together into Excel templates so that it could then be uploaded to a central system and made available to the NHS Test and Trace team as well as other government computer dashboards.

The problem is that the PHE developers picked an old file format to do this - known as XLS.

As a consequence, each template could handle only about 65,000 rows of data rather than the one million-plus rows that Excel is actually capable of.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,534
You'd be amazed how often stuff like that has to be done to make disparate IT systems talk to each other.
No I wouldn’t! Spent far too much time playing with text files to load them into excel spreadsheets or banking systems.
I am inferring (possibly incorrectly) that they were using .xls spreadsheets rather than .xlsm??
which would be idiotic and difficult (as excel keeps whining at you). Possibly they were bodging something they had used a while back for something similar (but much smaller scale).
 

87 027

Member
Joined
1 Sep 2010
Messages
699
Location
London
At the very least, if forced to use these horrible methods, I'd implement some basic checks and balances such as counting the number of input lines and comparing these with the Excel number of lines.

I completely agree, an utterly basic blunder! It hardly fills you with confidence about what else may be going on
 

johntea

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2010
Messages
2,602
£12bn and they could have probably hired a SQL developer, many of whom are ironically probably sat at home twiddling their thumbs on furlough or whatever at the moment for a few hundred quid a day to knock up a far superior solution!
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
9,253
Location
Yorkshire
I just can not imagine, as an IT professional of many years' standing, why anyone would conceive of using Excel with CSV input as a robust method of data gathering and storage. At the very least, if forced to use these horrible methods, I'd implement some basic checks and balances such as counting the number of input lines and comparing these with the Excel number of lines. Wisdom of hindsight? Perhaps. Basic competence? For sure. World-beating? Not under any circumstances.

I think the fact that these people are relying on Excel to be the basis for their implementation of a track/trace tool is disgusting and incompetent beyond belief. I just don't think that any competent person would consider it.
But Excel is the fix to every problem the world has ever seen, don’t you know ;) /sarcasm
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,734
Sky news suggests that Serco was sending the records of the tests over as CSVs, and PHE was trying to load them in an old version of Excel to transpose them into their existing system.

Nothing wrong with CSV for such a task...b ut you have to be careful with these systems.

£12bn and they could have probably hired a SQL developer, many of whom are ironically probably sat at home twiddling their thumbs on furlough or whatever at the moment for a few hundred quid a day to knock up a far superior solution!

Assuming the systems at both ends even use SQL, and are fully compliant solutions if they do.
This is not necessarily true.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,740
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
This will sound wrong because it is so serious, but I literally burst out laughing at this news. Not only because its such a simple error that could easily be got around, but also because it doesn't surprise me in the least. You see in certain parts of the public sector, keeping software running at current or current -1 versions, is, well sometimes a challenge because quite often there is considerable churn among those actually building in-house systems, mainly because many see the bright lights of the private sector and do one very quickly when they've padded out their CVs. So often older built applications don't get thrown at newer versions of things like Office as the release and so feet are dragged because often in the past these kinds of jobs where literally done by one person on a team, and not necessarily a proper IT / Dev one.

Oh the tales I could tell, and if my lottery numbers ever come in will....
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,734
This will sound wrong because it is so serious, but I literally burst out laughing at this news. Not only because its such a simple error that could easily be got around, but also because it doesn't surprise me in the least.

The really horrifying thing for me as somenoe who knows a bit about computer, that when presented with a dialogue box error about a large file.... noone even bothered to google what it meant.
They just saw some of the file had loaded in and ignored it.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,551
Location
UK
I'm wondering if this error is responsible for the apparent increase in cases in Nottingham, the spike seems uncharacteristically large
 

Steveoh

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2015
Messages
165
I'm wondering if this error is responsible for the apparent increase in cases in Nottingham, the spike seems uncharacteristically large

From https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-54420187

The University of Nottingham said there had been 425 confirmed cases among its student population in the week to 2 October, including 226 students in private accommodation and 106 others living in halls of residence.

That's just the university, not Trent
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
I'm wondering if this error is responsible for the apparent increase in cases in Nottingham, the spike seems uncharacteristically large

I think that spike is entirely on students returning to the city. UoN's term started 21st, so most students arriving weekend of the 19th. The cases really started going up from the 23rd which would fit with transmission on that weekend. You can even see that looking on the arcgis page they're all in the student areas -
University Park, Lenton Abbey, & Jubilee Campus (451) - self explanatory, the 2 main campuses for UoN
Lenton & Dunkirk (115) - lots of student year houses
Radford (123) - lots of student houses as well as a couple of halls of residence
The Park & Castle (96) - lots of student houses includes 'big' streets like Harlaxton Drive, Derby Grove
Arboretum, Forest & Trent University (137) - self explanatory
Beeston North (58) - lots of student houses as well as largest off-campus halls (Broadgate)
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
9,253
Location
Yorkshire
The really horrifying thing for me as somenoe who knows a bit about computer, that when presented with a dialogue box error about a large file.... noone even bothered to google what it meant.
They just saw some of the file had loaded in and ignored it.
I suspect it will have run as an automated batch task so any such errors may not have been seen in real time
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,089
I have an amount of sympathy with those managing all this. They are having to knock up this information on systems which are being put together by the day as things unfold, without any of the testing and version control normally done, with staff not particularly even in their normal offices but many needing to work from home. Surprising there aren't more such issues. Meanwhile there are journalists, with not a lot else to do currently, salivating by the minute to grab figures out of the reports the moment they are available. To cap it all the news media then overhype the error. Real pot calling the kettle black The Guardian doing so - did The Guardian never have any misprints?

Having said that, I am aware that it was, inevitably, not wholly NHS staff who have been putting the overall computer systems together, but one of the major IT government contractors, one of the "usual suspects", who charge the government a fortune for things like this. If all they have done is to knock up a non-robust spreadsheet solution, then someone from the National Audit Office needs to have a detailed look at what has been paid, and what has been delivered.

I am reminded of the chaotic opening of Heathrow Terminal 5 some years ago, which began when none of the staff could access the staff car park first thing in the morning. Although "tested", details of staff and their cars were being added to a simple spreadsheet daily. Someone who didn't know what they were doing went to add the final changes in the early hours, but just inserted cells instead of rows. All the cells with the car reg were thus pushed down by one against the names, loaded up to the car park system early that morning, whereupon the drivers entry gate location didn't tally with the auto numberplate reader, and so nobody got in.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
I have an amount of sympathy with those managing all this. They are having to knock up this information on systems which are being put together by the day

Serco are getting paid £12bn to run the world beating Serco Test and Trace system. I'm sorry, but for £12bn I'd expect a bit more than a shonky CSV file and some sticky-backed plastic.

Microsoft Office costs a couple of hundred quid. Where the hell has the rest of the cash gone?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top