Well - I'm sorry if you have that impression of developmentor and especially me, but all I am saying is that in most cases a DBA is one of the most important person on a project - even if you have to beg to get them to do something.
For example - developers cannot write efficient SQL statements without an integral knowledge of how the DB will optimize the query and which indexes have been set up. A good DBA will know this and be able to create SPs which are efficient and work correctly. Yes, DBAs are important for maintenance, but they should be continuously looking at how to make the database more efficient by analysing queries and re-doing indexes - which on a large scale site is a full time job. Oracle also tends to be installed on NON Intel platforms - are you telling me that MS developers can administer an Oracle installation on Unix? >Get real. I've yet to see a DBA who isn't a former developer and who >understands what it takes to write a reliable and efficient database (as >opposed to "maintain" an existing database, which most average DBAs are good at) I've worked with many dedicated DBAs (Dell, Ask Jeeves, RSA, QXL etc, etc) none came from a traditional programming background and all new their databases in side out - perhaps I've worked on larger systems? >B.S. - Oracle systems tend to have dedicated DBAs because Oracle >deliberately makes the process of keeping a database alive and healthy >overly complex. It's an integral part of their strategy for achieving a >lock on the market. After all, once you've landed that fat $120K/y Oracle >DBA job, you become the best advocate for staying with Oracle for the rest >of your life. Oracle IS NOT SQL server and is a far more complex product to tune and tweak - this requires a specialist skill and therefore specialist people. Sure if you're a good Oracle DBA why shouldn't you stick with it - don't SQL Server folks do the same? >Andrew, have you ever seen a database grid where servers are NOT running >against a common HDD subsystem and are still accessing the same data (i.e. >same database, same tables, just serving different users' queries)? I've seen an example of this configuration running at Oracle here in the UK i.e. shared distributed disk sets - admittedly it was 'show case' - but it worked :-) A -----Original Message----- From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kamen Lilov Sent: 14 September 2005 15:03 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Business logic Andrew, One message like this and you've already started to ruin the great reputation Developmentor has always had among senior developers. >> The most important person on any development project is usually a DBA. Good DBAs can save a >> project - simply because THEY know what they're doing and can create a performing database >> and schema. Unlike a developer or a system architect, who actually knows some worthless and lowly technologies, such as C# and object-oriented design? Get real. I've yet to see a DBA who isn't a former developer and who understands what it takes to write a reliable and efficient database (as opposed to "maintain" an existing database, which most average DBAs are good at) On the contrary: I see all the time DBAs who advocate that everything possible be written in TSQL (or PL/SQL) because that's what they know and what they control. Programming, it seems, is for those nerds over at R&D who can never meet a deadline and whose purpose in life seems to be breaking compatibility with the DBA's pet legacy databases. >> Oracle on the other hand has always suffered from inadequate tools (ported over from Unix) which >> developers DON'T understand. Oracle systems tend to have dedicated DBAs - simply because >> they're the only ones that understand Oracle i.e. TOAD. In consequence Oracle systems tend to >> be better designed that SQL server (in general) B.S. - Oracle systems tend to have dedicated DBAs because Oracle deliberately makes the process of keeping a database alive and healthy overly complex. It's an integral part of their strategy for achieving a lock on the market. After all, once you've landed that fat $120K/y Oracle DBA job, you become the best advocate for staying with Oracle for the rest of your life. >> Some food for thought - GRID, or more precisely Oracle 10g - the idea here is to run a Oracle in >> a GRID architecture i.e. many nodes, which makes the system very scalable - using their own >> I/O disk/file technology makes Oracle 10g a very fast database with potentially each query being >> serviced by a single node - much like Google (which has 100,000 machines worldwide) Andrew, have you ever seen a database grid where servers are NOT running against a common HDD subsystem and are still accessing the same data (i.e. same database, same tables, just serving different users' queries)? Once you get past the "shared HDD" configuration (which, I admit, is very powerful), "database grid" becomes a concept related to making database server administration easier - and definitely NOT to making horizontal scaling (scale-out) seamless. Kamen Lilov Delera Systems http://www.delera.com/blog/ =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor. http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
