Re: Oracle versus MS Sql Server

On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 20:42:23 +0100, "Michael G. Schneider" <mgs_at_mgs-software.de> wrote:

>Hi Dino,
>
>this thread is so long. I can hardly remember, which idea I told to whom.
>
>Summarizing: I understood the term "DBA" as a "Database Administrator". In
>my previous knowledge, prior to fighting in this thread, this is a very
>technical task. Your description under 2.2 show the direction of my
>thoughts. A DBA is responsible for the database having good performance and
>being secure. He is not responsible for the creation of the logical data
>model. And he also is not reponsible for finding the constraints. The DBA
>also does not necessarily have to know the application's business modell.
>
>As I do not want to start another fight, two remarks:
>
>[1] In the meantime I have been told, that older DBAs (but not all younger
>DBAs) are also perfectly trained at working in the early software
>development stages. And they also do know much about software development. I
>learned that already. No need to tell me again.
>
>[2] Even if the DBAs were "only" responsible for the technical
>well-behaviour of the database, this would not mean "I am looking down on
>them from my software developer view". Believe it or not: I always
>appreciate it very much, if a system, which I have to work on, is running
>smoothly. I do know the difficulties to make things work without problems.
>This is true for operating system administration as well as for database
>administration.
>
>Regarding your >>I am quite interested in the "somebody" who is responsible
>for data modeling.<<
>
>Usually the logical data model is initially done by me, in cooperation with
>the future users. The degree of cooperation depends on the user itsself.
>Some are very eager to work on this subject, and some (after some training)
>can also read e.g. a crow-foot-diagram. They probably would fail, if they
>had to create one on their own, but reading a diagram is much easier. Other
>users have a very hard time, thinking in terms of entities and
>relationships. They just tell the requirements and leave the modelling to
>me.
>
>After the the logical is written down and included in the requirement
>specification, it is discussed with some professional Data Modeller. This
>depends on the size of the customers. Big companies have such departments.
>Usually these are IT people knowing Data Modelling inside out. They don't
>have to think when explaining "5th Normal Form". Please do not tell this to
>others: if I go beyond 3NF, I have to get a piece of paper and a pencil, and
>think for a minute or two. Anyway, their input is appreciated very much.
>
>The physical data model is usually discussed in-house, between me and my
>co-workers. Maybe a customer has some standards regarding this part of the
>development, but many have not.
>
>Michael G. Schneider
>

So this means you don't involve DBAs in *ANY* stage of the project. This is exactly what DBAs consider as 'an application *dumped* on their doorstep'

Any database, Oracle being no exception, will run 'smoothly' when you exclude your valuable DBAs completely, as it is well known amongst DBAs in 80 percent of the performance problem case, whatever you do, if you can't change the application, you will just *NEVER* get it properly working.
You still seem to consider the Berlin Wall between developers and DBAs as a necessity and a good thing.
You are not aware, but you probably will be in the future, how many DBAs outright *SUFFER* from that attitude.

In summary, I still think you don't really know what your 'valuable' DBAs do. I do think your comments under [2] are only *lipservice*! Talk to them, tear down the wall!!! The Berlin wall has come down also, why do you insist on being headstrong?

Regards

Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address Received on Mon Oct 29 2001 - 13:59:44 CST