"Galen Boyer" <galenboyer_at_hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:ur8u3wdaz.fsf_at_verizon.net...
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam wrote:
>
> > ORA should look at splitting it. Basic and Advanced, at the
> > very least. With ratings. Eg: you need 200 points to be
> > Basic, 600 for Advanced. SQL and PL/SQL count 100 each, for
> > Basic. Backup and Recovery counts 200, so that's enough for
> > Basic (why on Earth would a developer want to know intricacies
> > of B&R or RMAN?). That's enough for a site that wants a
> > certified person to cope with daily B&R routine. No need to
> > spend incredible amounts training the punter in advanced
> > performance tuning or distributed stuff, for example. Sure, as
> > a future option. But not mandatory as is now.
>
> I agree with this. Its one reason I have shied away from them.
> I don't want to study all of Oracle. Its too damn much. My
> personal OCP has been taking a few interesting questions off this
> group that I don't know how to answer (God, I have lots to choose
> from) and just playing with Oracle until I'm confident I know it
> myself.
>
> This whole technology certification tract is actually something
> that MS got correct.
I can't agree with this last statement. The MCSE in particular is an almost
entirely useless piece of (expensive) paper that tells you nothing about the
capabilities of the engineer. Possibly paper like MCDBA and the developer
qualifications are better but the easy availability of crammers and the lack
of correlation to real world systems problems means that MS certification is
almost useless.
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
Received on Thu Aug 23 2001 - 04:59:54 CDT
