Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: OT: Ari and his company have been noted in InfoWorld.

RE: OT: Ari and his company have been noted in InfoWorld.

From: <DBarbour_at_austin.isd.tenet.edu>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 15:56:45 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.0034245C.20010705160023@fatcity.com>

Ethan,

Your scenario reminds me that I should have invested in paper company stocks when the paperless office was being theorized. Much of the "inefficiency" in which we indulge is due to extremely poor craftsmanship on the part of the people who produce packaged applications. When the applications mature, your scenario has a shot if we can change human nature. Most companies still shy away from outsourcing any of their critical apps. It's one of the problems ASP's are having.

David A. Barbour
Oracle DBA, OCP
AISD
512-414-1002

                                                                                       
                       
                    "Post, Ethan"                                                      
                       
                    <epost_at_kcc.co        To:     Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L 
<ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>  
                    m>                   cc:                                           
                       
                    Sent by:             Subject:     RE: OT: Ari and his company have 
been noted in          
                    root_at_fatcity.        InfoWorld.                                    
                       
                    com                                                                
                       
                                                                                       
                       
                                                                                       
                       
                    07/05/2001                                                         
                       
                    05:46 PM                                                           
                       
                    Please                                                             
                       
                    respond to                                                         
                       
                    ORACLE-L                                                           
                       
                                                                                       
                       
                                                                                       
                       




Michael,

No not all databases are the same but many are. DBA's as a whole are extremely inefficient. Most of us well know that we could automate much of what we do if we just sat down and thought about it for a second. I mean come on, why should a DBA have to actually check dozens of V$ views to "see"
if anything is going wrong? Yes, I know that there is software out there that will do that but since many of us are still doing this sort of thing manually my point is made. At some point a typical installation is going to
be fine to service 80% of all databases (the old rule of 80/20). These types of databases will not need a "live in" admin. They will run just fine
with occasional servicing much like your car. I agree that there will always be a need for DBA's, and I agree that the knowledge a db will need to
perform in the 20% of cases will increase. The development cycle seems to go like this:

  1. New version of db released with new features, features are difficult to use.
  2. Next version is released and new features have more power and easier to use, some more brand new features are included.
  3. an so on and so on....

Everyone in the industry is working to make life simpler for the mass 80%. Plug the box in, install Oracle, set a few settings, plug in the storage device, sign up for a remote dba service and go....

Now it seems to me that this is the way it is going to be because:

  1. It is technologically possible.
  2. It is cheaper, faster, better.
  3. More and more packaged applications running on databases.

Now you might think that you will in ten years still be capable of convincing a your company that they can not live without a "real" DBA but I say there is already a whole industry working to convince them otherwise. In ten years they will cover a lot of ground. I'm sure we will see the database to dba ratio change significantly and that means more remote management, maybe still from an office, but more databases over wider areas.
Talking to your database will be as easy as talking to someone on the phone.

555-5555....shutdown abort.

-----Original Message-----

Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 3:10 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

I wonder if a similar thought was echoed in 1991? Maybe all of the DBAs that were former DB2, etc DBAs could offer some war stories here. It's funny that databases have become more cumbersome to manage, not easier IMHO.
DBAs have to understand more technologies that are outside the RDBMS box than ever before. Every time we get a new version it gets a little more complicated to manage. I suppose we should just put everything in autoextend mode, oversize the SGA and other memory structures and we would be able to manage 1000's of databases. Not likely now, or ever for that matter. All of the quick fixes leave out one particular fact: All databases
are unique and have their share of unique problems. Thank goodness for that!

I can't wait to take a vacation and recover a standby database while adrift on the ocean. It gives "Cast Away" a whole new meaning!

:))

--Michael


This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only and may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under law. If you have received this message in error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. Thank you.


--

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--

Author: Post, Ethan
  INET: epost_at_kcc.com

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

--

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--

Author:
  INET: DBarbour_at_austin.isd.tenet.edu

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). Received on Thu Jul 05 2001 - 17:56:45 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US