More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not taken as seriously as it once was.
Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their own DDL.
Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
Here are some recent examples ...
- I had to pull teeth to get my current company to switch to RMAN.
- I got laughed at for naming NOT NULL constraints in my CREATE TABLE scripts
- I had a one of my designs tossed out because it had triggers, clusters, and deferrable FK constraints in it.
- I have been telling management for almost a year to get off 8i -- falls on deaf ears of course
- I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to rewrite for speed.
- I get crap from the UNIX SAs at just the thought using 10g ASM when we finally upgrade, by that time Oracle 13 will be out.
- I have developers who commit every SQL statement and throw highly denormalized tables at me, but management still feels they should NOT have to come to me to get a table designed.
- HA requirements but they refuse to use RAC or Data Guard.
This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in general.
You are not alone. Even though, Oracle keeps coming with new features, it is very difficult to use them in projects for reasons you mentioned.
Also, for last two years I have been working in the world of packaged applications where all database design etc has been done by vendors. Vendors want to run their application against many versions of Oracle as well as against different databases such as SQL Server, DB2 UDB, so they do not use anything new of Oracle.
Domenic wrote: > I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
> More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not > taken as seriously as it once was.
> Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see > the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current > with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to > use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will > lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their > own DDL.
> Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
> Here are some recent examples ...
> - I had to pull teeth to get my current company to switch to RMAN.
> - I got laughed at for naming NOT NULL constraints in my CREATE TABLE > scripts
> - I had a one of my designs tossed out because it had triggers, > clusters, and deferrable FK constraints in it.
> - I have been telling management for almost a year to get off 8i -- > falls on deaf ears of course
> - I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries > (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to > rewrite for speed.
> - I get crap from the UNIX SAs at just the thought using 10g ASM when > we finally upgrade, by that time Oracle 13 will be out.
> - I have developers who commit every SQL statement and throw highly > denormalized tables at me, but management still feels they should NOT > have to come to me to get a table designed.
> - HA requirements but they refuse to use RAC or Data Guard.
> This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same > lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than > anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in > general.
> Is it just me, or does this go on everywhere?
> Domenic.
I'm going to take an admittedly contoversial approach to answering your inquiry expecting others to throw a match at the gasoline I am sloshing about. Here goes:
Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
They were, past tense, competent when they learned their trade with version 6.x or 7.x but they have not invested much effort in upgrading their skills since then. They have self-defined their job as install, manage users and schemas, patch, backup, and pray you don't have to restore. They haven't read the Net Services book since it was 700 pages which was a very long time, and more than 1000 new pages, ago.
They have not learned App Server. They wouldn't know an ear file from a jar file. They have not learned RMAN They have not learned DataGuard They have not learned DBMS_XPLAN They have not even learned to read a StatsPack.
We are in the same position as were physicians before they started policing their own ranks with certifications that had meaning and requirements for continuing education to maintain certification. So as our DBA community ages so does its skill set.
Now I didn't say all ... so keep your flames appropriate to the provocation. ;-) -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damor...@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
> Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
Well, isn't it everyone's dream in US employment to reach their level of incompetence? By the way, that is supposed to be a joke. Obsolescence and outsourcing should scare them out of complacency.
You left off pl/sql coding. Dataguard is only useful to those running EE. I'd say that System Administration and Security would be areas worthy of study, also but I doubt that Domenic (OP) could actually get any security-related changes implemented.
domen...@hotmail.com (Domenic) writes: > I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
> More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not > taken as seriously as it once was.
> Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see > the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current > with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to > use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will > lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their > own DDL.
> Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
> Here are some recent examples ...
> - I had to pull teeth to get my current company to switch to RMAN.
> - I got laughed at for naming NOT NULL constraints in my CREATE TABLE > scripts
hehe - you see their thinking hasnt gone that far - they still don't know which columns should and should not allow null (if any) because no real analysis or design has occured.
> - I had a one of my designs tossed out because it had triggers, > clusters, and deferrable FK constraints in it.
I suspect they wee tossed out because they didn't understand even what a FK was.
> - I have been telling management for almost a year to get off 8i -- > falls on deaf ears of course
Still trying to get rid of an 8i db ourselves.
> - I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries > (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to > rewrite for speed.
We have actually started giving a can of 'spam' to the developer which either does the largest cartesian join or the simplest select statement with the record for consistent 'gets'.
> - I get crap from the UNIX SAs at just the thought using 10g ASM when > we finally upgrade, by that time Oracle 13 will be out.
Lucky here - DBAs and Sys Admins get on well and both want to see us get to 10g sooner rather than later.
> - I have developers who commit every SQL statement and throw highly > denormalized tables at me, but management still feels they should NOT > have to come to me to get a table designed.
We get that and the opposite - huge numbers of unrelated inserts without any commits which keep blowing out rollback segments no matter how large they are! Really seems to be know mental comprehension of what a commit is and when and when not to use it.
> - HA requirements but they refuse to use RAC or Data Guard.
Same and it took nearly 12 months to convince the business and developers of the merits of hot backups instead of nightly cold backups!
> This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same > lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than > anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in > general.
Not sure if its 'hostile' or just plain old ignorance and a failure to recognize the relevance of knowledge which is outside your own specialist area (like java programming).
> Is it just me, or does this go on everywhere?
I'm no longer doing development or DBA work (I was only ever an Oracle DBA 'in training' anyway). I made the fatal mistake of moving into management and now have to manage the DBAs, Unix and Windows and network sys admins.
We are very lucky in that we have a very experienced, capable and professional senior DBA and a very capable and promising 'junior' DBA (he isn't really junior, just not senior - if you get the difference). We also have some very capable sys admins. Luckily, the sys admins and DBAs have a very good and strong working relationship. However, the DBAs do cop a lot of flak from some of the developers and from some of the other managers. One of the managers from the business side of things actually made the statement a few weeks ago that DBAs were really just glorified helpdesk staff - you see, he is an expert because he has a MSCE!
There is a constant battle with the developers because they feel the DBAs (and sys admins) are simply there to make their life difficult - they get upset when we reject work they have done because it is inefficient, has security holes or is just a bad design.
Unfortunately, the style of management around these days is all about short-term benefits and getting projects 'over the line'. Very little is put into good solid long term solutions. I believe its because most managers I've come across had no other real skill other than 'managing' and really only wanted to climb the career ladder. For them, any solution which lasts more than 5 years is a waste as they will be long gone onto that next promotion - they want quick short term success at a low cost so that it looks like they have done their job better and can get that promotion and fatter pay packet sooner. therefore, they pay cheap inexperienced developers to get the job done quick and dirty and don't want irritating DBAs getting in the way.
I see all of the things you listed on nearly a daily basis. When I first started in this industry, the DBA was a person you went to for advice and guidence - but back then, nearly all the developers new at least the first 3 normal forms, they new who Cobb was and beleived they were building systems which would last and require minimal maintenance.
The last laugh is with me though! I've been given the job of selecting the new development platform for the developers. Currently, they only use Oracle forms and reports. the problem is that we have changed direction and no longer do really full blown development, but rather integration of systems and setting up reporting frameworks etc. The type of work now requires rapid turn-around and the Oracle tools just don't cut it for this type of work. I've been given the job because the developers couldn't agree on a direction.
All the developers are really worried as they know my favorite language of all is Common Lisp. I've led them to believe this is what I'm going to be putting into place - of course, there is no way I could ever sell this to the business (unfortunately), but its fun watching the panic and fear in their eyes!
In reality, I'll probably go with Java and a scripting language like Perl (or python!).
Tim
-- Tim Cross The e-mail address on this message is FALSE (obviously!). My real e-mail is to a company in Australia called rapttech and my login is tcross - if you really need to send mail, you should be able to work it out!
DA Morgan <damor...@x.washington.edu> writes: > Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
> They were, past tense, competent when they learned their trade with > version 6.x or 7.x but they have not invested much effort in upgrading > their skills since then. They have self-defined their job as install, > manage users and schemas, patch, backup, and pray you don't have to > restore. They haven't read the Net Services book since it was 700 pages > which was a very long time, and more than 1000 new pages, ago.
> They have not learned App Server. > They wouldn't know an ear file from a jar file. > They have not learned RMAN > They have not learned DataGuard > They have not learned DBMS_XPLAN > They have not even learned to read a StatsPack.
> We are in the same position as were physicians before they started > policing their own ranks with certifications that had meaning and > requirements for continuing education to maintain certification. So > as our DBA community ages so does its skill set.
> Now I didn't say all ... so keep your flames appropriate to the > provocation. ;-)
Maybe I've been even luckier than I thought - the DBAs I've worked with have been very good. However, I would point out some mitigation for your observations - I'd suggest a big part of the problem here is the lack of time made available for DBAs to keep their knowledge up to date. while I do beleive every professional ha a responsability to maintain their specialist knowledge and a good part of it should be maintained in their own time, I also feel employers should be encouraging and supporting this process. Most of the DBAs I've worked with have been required to do large amounts of 'out of hours' work as well as their normal hours work. Ive had to fight and argue very hard to get the funds necessary to send our DBAs on training and to relevant conferences.
The drop in skill amongst DBAs is probably paralleled with the drop in skill of developers generally. I've seen very little investment put into either area and have noticed a declining wage and increasing expectations for hours of work in both areas. Business/employes need to invest in these resources if they want long term benefits - but most don't.
Tim -- Tim Cross The e-mail address on this message is FALSE (obviously!). My real e-mail is to a company in Australia called rapttech and my login is tcross - if you really need to send mail, you should be able to work it out!
DA Morgan apparently said,on my timestamp of 11/04/2005 2:15 PM:
> I'm going to take an admittedly contoversial approach to answering > your inquiry expecting others to throw a match at the gasoline I am > sloshing about. Here goes:
> Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
I'm inclined to agree with you, for essentially the same reasons. The number of "pretend" dba's out there is staggering. The only difference in our points of view is that I see it happening with dba's of ALL ages, not just the old ones...
-- Cheers Nuno Souto in sunny Sydney, Australia wizofo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam
Tim X wrote: > domen...@hotmail.com (Domenic) writes:
>>I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
>>More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not >>taken as seriously as it once was.
[...] > Unfortunately, the style of management around these days is all about > short-term benefits and getting projects 'over the line'. Very little > is put into good solid long term solutions. I believe its because most > managers I've come across had no other real skill other than > 'managing' and really only wanted to climb the career ladder. For > them, any solution which lasts more than 5 years is a waste as they > will be long gone onto that next promotion - they want quick short > term success at a low cost so that it looks like they have done their > job better and can get that promotion and fatter pay packet > sooner. therefore, they pay cheap inexperienced developers to get the > job done quick and dirty and don't want irritating DBAs getting in the > way. [...]
> Tim
You beat me to the punch, being the first respondent in this thread to identify poor management as the underlying cause of the problem, instead of just relating the symptoms (isn't that what good DBA's are supposed to do? ;-)
>>Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
> Well, isn't it everyone's dream in US employment to reach their level > of incompetence? > By the way, that is supposed to be a joke. > Obsolescence and outsourcing should scare them out of complacency.
> You left off pl/sql coding. > Dataguard is only useful to those running EE. > I'd say that System Administration and Security would be areas worthy > of study, also but I doubt that Domenic (OP) could actually get any > security-related changes implemented.
> -bdbafh
So is partitioning option. But any DBA that doesn't have EE installed on a machine at home, or a laptop so that they can study the technology is not doing their job. To return to my physician analogy ... you don't learn about neurosurgery after the patient is on the gurney. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damor...@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Tim X wrote: > DA Morgan <damor...@x.washington.edu> writes:
>>Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
>>They were, past tense, competent when they learned their trade with >>version 6.x or 7.x but they have not invested much effort in upgrading >>their skills since then. They have self-defined their job as install, >>manage users and schemas, patch, backup, and pray you don't have to >>restore. They haven't read the Net Services book since it was 700 pages >>which was a very long time, and more than 1000 new pages, ago.
>>They have not learned App Server. >>They wouldn't know an ear file from a jar file. >>They have not learned RMAN >>They have not learned DataGuard >>They have not learned DBMS_XPLAN >>They have not even learned to read a StatsPack.
>>We are in the same position as were physicians before they started >>policing their own ranks with certifications that had meaning and >>requirements for continuing education to maintain certification. So >>as our DBA community ages so does its skill set.
>>Now I didn't say all ... so keep your flames appropriate to the >>provocation. ;-)
> Maybe I've been even luckier than I thought - the DBAs I've worked > with have been very good. However, I would point out some mitigation > for your observations - I'd suggest a big part of the problem here is > the lack of time made available for DBAs to keep their knowledge up to > date. while I do beleive every professional ha a responsability to > maintain their specialist knowledge and a good part of it should be > maintained in their own time, I also feel employers should be > encouraging and supporting this process. Most of the DBAs I've worked > with have been required to do large amounts of 'out of hours' work as > well as their normal hours work. Ive had to fight and argue very hard > to get the funds necessary to send our DBAs on training and to > relevant conferences.
> The drop in skill amongst DBAs is probably paralleled with the drop in > skill of developers generally. I've seen very little investment put > into either area and have noticed a declining wage and increasing > expectations for hours of work in both areas. Business/employes need > to invest in these resources if they want long term benefits - but > most don't.
> Tim
I agree with all of your points.
DBAs, and developers too, should insist on the cost of training being included with the cost of any upgrade planning. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damor...@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Noons wrote: > DA Morgan apparently said,on my timestamp of 11/04/2005 2:15 PM:
>> I'm going to take an admittedly contoversial approach to answering >> your inquiry expecting others to throw a match at the gasoline I am >> sloshing about. Here goes:
>> Most DBAs are totally incompetent and deserve little if any respect.
> I'm inclined to agree with you, for essentially the same > reasons. The number of "pretend" dba's out there is > staggering. The only difference in our points of view > is that I see it happening with dba's of ALL ages, not just > the old ones...
Alas I agree with you too.
No matches tossed into the petrol. I'm losing my touch. ;-) -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damor...@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
domen...@hotmail.com (Domenic) wrote: > I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
> More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not > taken as seriously as it once was.
> Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see > the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current > with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to > use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will > lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their > own DDL.
When I waited for the DBA to model and write the DDL, it simply never got done. I was forced, as a developer (well, not even that, more like as an advanced end user, really) to do the modelling and DDL myself if I actually wanted to have a schema. And then when I gave the DDL to the then DBA to implement (along with expected growth rates), he complained it didn't have storage clauses. You are the DBA, how about you add the storage clauses?
> Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
> Here are some recent examples ...
Most of these things don't sound specific to only DBAs at all, it is merely an industry-wide Dilbert cartoon, viewed through the eyes of a DBA.
> - I had to pull teeth to get my current company to switch to RMAN.
> - I got laughed at for naming NOT NULL constraints in my CREATE TABLE > scripts
Well, this one I kind of see. Why would a numeric not null column need a separately named not null constraint any more than it needs a separately named numericity constraint. Both of these constraints are inherent to the column definition, are they not?
> - I had a one of my designs tossed out because it had triggers, > clusters, and deferrable FK constraints in it.
> - I have been telling management for almost a year to get off 8i -- > falls on deaf ears of course
> - I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries > (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to > rewrite for speed.
Well, isn't that part of your job? Is your complaint that the developers aren't tuning their own queries (which if they did would make DBAs even more trivial) or that developers are even writing queries in the first place?
> - I get crap from the UNIX SAs at just the thought using 10g ASM when > we finally upgrade, by that time Oracle 13 will be out.
> - I have developers who commit every SQL statement and throw highly > denormalized tables at me, but management still feels they should NOT > have to come to me to get a table designed.
> - HA requirements but they refuse to use RAC or Data Guard.
Are they legitimate HA requirements, or does someone just like saying 24/7 because it makes them sound hip?
> This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same > lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than > anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in > general.
> Is it just me, or does this go on everywhere?
Not just everywhere, but with every other profession as well.
Xho
-- -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ -------------------- Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
> I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries > (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to > rewrite for speed.
Just curious, why does the presence of correlated subqueries or NOT EXISTS clauses equate to a poorly written query? As a DBA & developer, I've used them quite frequently and they perform just fine. Is there a more efficient alternative?
BigBoot...@hotmail.com wrote: >>I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries >>(correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to >>rewrite for speed.
> Just curious, why does the presence of correlated subqueries or NOT > EXISTS clauses equate to a poorly written query? As a DBA & developer, > I've used them quite frequently and they perform just fine. Is there a > more efficient alternative?
> -Steve
No. Certainly they are not the silver bullet solution usable in ALL situations ... but no. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damor...@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>domen...@hotmail.com (Domenic) wrote: >> I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
>> More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not >> taken as seriously as it once was.
>> Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see >> the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current >> with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to >> use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will >> lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their >> own DDL.
>When I waited for the DBA to model and write the DDL, it simply never >got done. I was forced, as a developer (well, not even that, more >like as an advanced end user, really) to do the modelling and DDL myself >if I actually wanted to have a schema. And then when I gave the DDL to the >then DBA to implement (along with expected growth rates), he complained it >didn't have storage clauses. You are the DBA, how about you add the >storage clauses?
My experience is that most developers don't know how to set up a datamodel and have never heard of normalization.
>> Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
>> Here are some recent examples ...
>Most of these things don't sound specific to only DBAs at all, it is merely >an industry-wide Dilbert cartoon, viewed through the eyes of a DBA.
>> - I had to pull teeth to get my current company to switch to RMAN.
>> - I got laughed at for naming NOT NULL constraints in my CREATE TABLE >> scripts
>Well, this one I kind of see. Why would a numeric not null column need a >separately named not null constraint any more than it needs a separately >named numericity constraint. Both of these constraints are inherent to the >column definition, are they not?
>> - I had a one of my designs tossed out because it had triggers, >> clusters, and deferrable FK constraints in it.
>> - I have been telling management for almost a year to get off 8i -- >> falls on deaf ears of course
>> - I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries >> (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to >> rewrite for speed.
>Well, isn't that part of your job? Is your complaint that the developers >aren't tuning their own queries (which if they did would make DBAs even >more trivial) or that developers are even writing queries in the first >place?
His complaint is that most developers don't KNOW how to tune their queries. Consequently the crapplication work as long as it contains 50 records. As soon as it gets into production the crapplication collapses and developers start blaming the DBA, who 'doesn't know anything about databases'
>> - I get crap from the UNIX SAs at just the thought using 10g ASM when >> we finally upgrade, by that time Oracle 13 will be out.
>> - I have developers who commit every SQL statement and throw highly >> denormalized tables at me, but management still feels they should NOT >> have to come to me to get a table designed.
>> - HA requirements but they refuse to use RAC or Data Guard.
>Are they legitimate HA requirements, or does someone just like saying >24/7 because it makes them sound hip?
>> This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same >> lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than >> anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in >> general.
>> Is it just me, or does this go on everywhere?
>Not just everywhere, but with every other profession as well.
>So is partitioning option. But any DBA that doesn't have EE installed >on a machine at home, or a laptop so that they can study the technology >is not doing their job. To return to my physician analogy ... you don't >learn about neurosurgery after the patient is on the gurney.
I am now picturing Dr. Frankenstein practicing his neurosurgery at home.
I don't have time to go "shopping" (ie checking wrong linux compatibility lists, taking incorrect firewire advice, and on anon, not to mention actually _buying_ one) for a PC that could run EE because I'm too busy working on it at work.
jg -- @home.com is bogus. "It takes intelligence, concentration, process and detail orientation, anal retentiveness, and other such endearing personality traits to make a good dba. Those traits are AS IMPORTANT as technical skills." - Michael from Allentown, PA
> So is partitioning option. But any DBA that doesn't have EE installed > on a machine at home, or a laptop so that they can study the technology > is not doing their job. To return to my physician analogy ... you don't > learn about neurosurgery after the patient is on the gurney.
I think this is quite a valid point. Many years ago, it was difficult to get a platform you could run at home and 'play' with to learn your trade - desktop machines were not up to it and often you couldn't get a version which would run on something an individual could afford.
However, these days, therre is just no excuse - between windows and linux, there is little you cannot run at home on a PC - even so called 'enterprise editions'.
Personally, I just don't understand the resistance some have to learning 'out of hours' - while I argued earlier in this thread that management needs to invest more in the training etc, I still strongly believe that as a professional, you have a responsability to keep 'up to speed' yourself - if for no other reason thatn to make sure you keep your employment options open.
When working as a developer and when working in the DBA area, I always made sure I had an environment at home which was as far as possible a mirror of my work environment - I would use this as a place to learn, experiment and try out new ideas.
Tim
-- Tim Cross The e-mail address on this message is FALSE (obviously!). My real e-mail is to a company in Australia called rapttech and my login is tcross - if you really need to send mail, you should be able to work it out!
On 11 Apr 2005 17:20:17 GMT, xhos...@gmail.com wrote:
>When I waited for the DBA to model and write the DDL, it simply never >got done. I was forced, as a developer (well, not even that, more >like as an advanced end user, really) to do the modelling and DDL myself >if I actually wanted to have a schema. And then when I gave the DDL to the >then DBA to implement (along with expected growth rates), he complained it >didn't have storage clauses. You are the DBA, how about you add the >storage clauses?
That happens. If you developed the DDL as a compromise (becasue they didn't have the time), the DBAs should have made their expectations known and let you know in advance what kind of storage they were looking for.
>> - I got laughed at for naming NOT NULL constraints in my CREATE TABLE >> scripts
>Well, this one I kind of see. Why would a numeric not null column need a >separately named not null constraint any more than it needs a separately >named numericity constraint. Both of these constraints are inherent to the >column definition, are they not?
Export and import mostly. Named constraints are good. If you have an unamed not null constraint, export the schema, import to a different database with an unnamed constraint of the same name, kerblooey. If a constraint is not explicitly named, oracle will name it for you. SQL standards would help there as would using a design tool instead of hand coding everything.
>> - I get apps tossed at me with hundreds of poorly written queries >> (correlated subqueries everywhere, NOT EXISTS, etc.) that I have to >> rewrite for speed.
>Well, isn't that part of your job? Is your complaint that the developers >aren't tuning their own queries (which if they did would make DBAs even >more trivial) or that developers are even writing queries in the first >place?
That really depends on the environment. I've been places where developers were expected to tune things themselves and places where the DBAs had to babysit. If the developers have the skills, or want to learn them, that should be supported by the DBAs. If they don't have the skills, the DBAs should communicate to their management the problem of tuning complete applications after they've been built. This one would probably require a management change.
>> Is it just me, or does this go on everywhere?
>Not just everywhere, but with every other profession as well.
Yep. I agree with that.
Lewis
----------------------------------------------------------- Lewis R Cunningham
I am a new DBA and still in training, however my company pays for all my training and ensure i have enough time in a day to learn. It is an expectation that all dba's senior and junior thake the time to do at least an hour a day of reserach/training to keep them up to date and continually improving their skills. Is it the fault of an overworked DBA who doesnt get the time in work hours for training so that they can do their job better. Why should it be an expectation that a DBA must do addition hours at home so that he can do his job better for his disgruntle employer, who makes no effort in looking after his employees. At what point did work become part of the home life?
One should remember that one can only learn so much in spare time at home. To learn new skills and keep up with latest technologies one has to find a work environment. The root cause of the problem at least in USA is the way industries operate. Job's have been made so narrowly specialized. One is forced to do same thing over and over again. Why one cannot do both development and DBA work especially when a person knows both. I could never find a job like that. I always had to take off my development skills from resume to find a DBA job. Industries are constantly eliminating jobs, hire only temporary workers and keep sending jobs offshore. They only want people with many years of experience in some narrow area. In last three years, I am forced to change companies every year. As soon as I arrive in a company, I find that people from offshore are coming for training and majority of IT work will be taken over by them. Can someone tell me in a work environment like that how you can prosper?
So name of the game is to pray and hope you can keep finding some or other job until you are in your grave. Executives in corporations in USA (may be true of other countries) are ugly, self centered, with no interest in employees or long term interest of country. Only thing which matters is how to get rich quickly.
DA Morgan is fortunate, he has a University Professor job where he has opportunity to try different things, learn new skills, etc. He does not have to worry every day about some corporate merger, management change, or disappearance of his job. So, he is probably thinking that everyone has same opportunity and all DBA's should be at his level. Let us face it, the way industries operate, there is not that much one can do in terms of improving skill set. If no one gives you a job as a developer, you can learn all the programming languages in your spare time and sooner or later you will loss interest in them and your skills will become outdated. A friend of mine who did Ph.D in Computer Science, has many years of experience in software development, was let go because IBM sent this job to India. He could not find a developer or any other IT job in Industry. He was forced to become a substitute teacher in his township public school. He is not alone, in USA number of people like him keep increasing. Does any one have idea what one can do in terms of skillset improvement to stop that. I don't think you can do anything.
------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: I work for a company that makes a product that writes Java to run run SQL and PL/SQL statements... -------------------------------------------------------------
Domenic wrote: > I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
> More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not > taken as seriously as it once was.
> Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see > the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current > with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to > use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will > lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their > own DDL.
> Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
> Here are some recent examples ...
...
> This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same > lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than > anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in > general.
I think there is a general pattern of new computer science graduates not taking databases as seriously as they used to. DBAs are the anesthesiologists of the software industry - unfashionable, but try building a real system without them!
I have first hand experience of developers who regard the database as a 'storage device'. I had to spend *weeks* fighting with a developer on his second job out of college who's idea of using a database for on-line mortgage applications was to serialize his Java objects and store them in BLOB columns. Can you imagine what writing the reports would have been like?
Unlike COBOL, C or C++, modeling an entire application in a computer language as opposed to the database is not only possible but practical with Java, with the result being that the people who do the actual coding don't see the value in having business logic and rules at the database level. Current notions about multi-tier architectures also come into this, with some developers regarding things like foreign key constraints as 'business logic' that should be dealt with at the 'application server' layer.
When it comes to Java and Oracle the JDBC standard is also a factor. The capabilities of PL/SQL are so far ahead of what JDBC will easily support that it's very easy for a PL/SQL developer to write a procedure that can't be run from Java without the user of a pre-compiler, wrapper procedures or laboriously hand-coding anonymous blocks (this is the issue my employer addresses). If the DBA's keep producing procedures that the Java developers can't use without jumping through hoops a degree of frustration and even hostility is hardly surprising.
Oracle is also a victim of its own success when it comes to 8i. 8i is good. So good that there's no *compelling* incentive to upgrade to 9i or 10g. People in the Oracle community know that an upgrade will have to be done sooner or later and that the new versions are indeed better but in a lot of cases management will perceive it as more money to solve a non-existent problem.
------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: I work for a company that makes a product that writes Java to run run SQL and PL/SQL statements... -------------------------------------------------------------
Domenic wrote: > I'd like everyone's thoughts on this ...
> More and more I am finding that the role of the Oracle DBA is not > taken as seriously as it once was.
> Having worked for many software companies in the last few years I see > the same pattern over and over -- most shops refuse to stay current > with Oracle and patchsets -- they're still running 8i, don't want to > use Oracle-specific features (clusters, IOTs, etc.) for fear it will > lock them into Oracle, and let the developers model and write their > own DDL.
> Most of the time I feel they only want a DBA to put out fires.
> Here are some recent examples ...
...
> This is not just my current company, but they all seem to be the same > lately. It seems that the Java shops operate this way more than > anyone else -- very hostile attitude towards Oracle and DBAs in > general.
I think there is a general pattern of new computer science graduates not taking databases as seriously as they used to. DBAs are the anesthesiologists of the software industry - unfashionable, but try building a real system without them!
I have first hand experience of developers who regard the database as a 'storage device'. I had to spend *weeks* fighting with a developer on his second job out of college who's idea of using a database for on-line mortage applications was to serialize his Java objects and store them in BLOB columns. Can you imagine what writing the reports would have been like?
Unlike COBOL, C or C++, modeling an entire application in a computer language as opposed to the database is not only possible but practical with Java, with the result being that the people who do the actual coding don't see the value in having business logic and rules at the database level. Current notions about multi-tier architechtures also come into this, with some developers regarding things like foreign key constraints as 'business logic' that should be dealt with at the 'application server' layer.
When it comes to Java and Oracle the JDBC standard is also a factor. The capabilities of PL/SQL are so far ahead of what JDBC will easily support that it's very easy for a PL/SQL developer to write a procedure that can't be run from Java without the user of a pre-compiler, wrapper procedures or laboriously hand-coding anonymous blocks (this is the issue my employer addresses). If the DBA's keep producing procedures that the Java developers can't use without jumping through hoops a degree of frustration and even hostility is hardly surprising.
Oracle is also a victim of its own success when it comes to 8i. 8i is good. So good that there's no *compelling* incentive to upgrade to 9i or 10g. People in the Oracle community know that an upgrade will have to be done sooner or later and that the new versions are indeed better but in a lot of cases management will perceive it as more money to solve a non-existant problem.
Tim X wrote: > DA Morgan <damor...@x.washington.edu> writes:
>>So is partitioning option. But any DBA that doesn't have EE installed >>on a machine at home, or a laptop so that they can study the technology >>is not doing their job. To return to my physician analogy ... you don't >>learn about neurosurgery after the patient is on the gurney.
> I think this is quite a valid point. Many years ago, it was difficult > to get a platform you could run at home and 'play' with to learn your > trade - desktop machines were not up to it and often you couldn't get > a version which would run on something an individual could afford.
Many, many, MANY years, then... I have been running Oracle on laptops (and desktops) for about 10 years...
> However, these days, therre is just no excuse - between windows and > linux, there is little you cannot run at home on a PC - even so called > 'enterprise editions'.
Explain the differences in options between Oracle Personal, and Oracle Enterprise editions. For learning purposes, none.
As for 'footprint' - that's up to you: you may not need to copy all your production system parameter settings.
> Personally, I just don't understand the resistance some have to > learning 'out of hours' - while I argued earlier in this thread that > management needs to invest more in the training etc, I still strongly > believe that as a professional, you have a responsability to keep 'up > to speed' yourself - if for no other reason thatn to make sure you > keep your employment options open.
Agree, but I feel there should be some reward in this off-hour study; allow to visit (E)OUG meetings during office hours, all expenses paid. That kind of stuff.
> When working as a developer and when working in the DBA area, I always > made sure I had an environment at home which was as far as possible a > mirror of my work environment - I would use this as a place to learn, > experiment and try out new ideas.
Now, with OAS, that may be over the top for some desktops. :)
Frank van Bortel <fvanbor...@netscape.net> writes:
> Agree, but I feel there should be some reward in this off-hour study; > allow to visit (E)OUG meetings during office hours, all expenses paid. > That kind of stuff.
Agreed. I think there should always be more carrot than stick!
> Now, with OAS, that may be over the top for some desktops. :)
Yes - very true - its all getting very large an complex and you probably do need to select what is needed rather than everything - though disk is getting cheapre and cpus are getting faster! My main point is that you can now have an environment on your laptop which is increadibly close to your production environment and really be able to use good old 'suck and see' approaches to learning and be very confident the results you observe are likely to be extremely close to what you would see on a full blown production system.
Maybe I'm a little thick sometimes, but I have always found the ability to try out my understanding and clarify my knowledge by testing it invaluable. I often find descriptions and manuals lacking in crucial bits of knowledge or not quite being clear enough for me to grasp - the ability to freely experiment in an environment close to the production system. There have been times in the past when I've tried something out on a 'stripped down' version or on a really different platform (windows v unix like systems etc) and thought I had a grasp on it all only to find there was some subtle but critical difference between the two - not saying this is the case with Oracle personal edition or windows edition, but it is something which has happened with other systems.
Tim
-- Tim Cross The e-mail address on this message is FALSE (obviously!). My real e-mail is to a company in Australia called rapttech and my login is tcross - if you really need to send mail, you should be able to work it out!
"HF" <h.fri...@uq.edu.au> writes: > I am a new DBA and still in training, however my company pays for all my > training and ensure i have enough time in a day to learn. It is an > expectation that all dba's senior and junior thake the time to do at least > an hour a day of reserach/training to keep them up to date and continually > improving their skills. Is it the fault of an overworked DBA who doesnt get > the time in work hours for training so that they can do their job better. > Why should it be an expectation that a DBA must do addition hours at home so > that he can do his job better for his disgruntle employer, who makes no > effort in looking after his employees. At what point did work become part of > the home life?
Work has been part of the 'home life' for a long long time. I think that if you want to reach the same level of 'professional' clasification as medical doctors/specialists, barristers/lawyers, architects etc, then there is an expectation of some personal professional development. If on the other hand you want to look at professionalism in the vain of plumbers, carpenters, middle managers etc, then there may be less requirement to do as much 'at home' learning - but then again, the rate of change in these professions tends to be a lot slower than in IT. However, what really frustrates me is the fact too many employers seem to want professionals in the vain of Barristers and doctors, but only want to pay the salary of middle managers or less!
I guess it all depends on what you want to aim at and what really matters to you. I do feel there is too much of a trend towards longer work hours and too much encroachment on our personal lives by our professional lives and employers are all too often expecting too much - I guess its all about what the market will bare!
-- Tim Cross The e-mail address on this message is FALSE (obviously!). My real e-mail is to a company in Australia called rapttech and my login is tcross - if you really need to send mail, you should be able to work it out!
|
