In my short and simple opinion:
- Most DBAs do not require the level of knowledge shown for instance by
some participants in this forum. Many DBAs I've worked with try to make out
that being a DBA is a tremendously difficult job - it isn't.
- DBAs DO need to be able to address new problems/situations as they
arise - in my experience, this is an attitude, not a skill and is not
something people learn over time.
- They should never stop learning.
- Certification is a largely pointless exercise because certification tests
are based on what can easily be measured by computer and so generate a
profit.
- You cannot tell from the number of years spent doing something if the
person doing it learnt anything - it is therefore *foolish* to base a
decision on that, rather than an evaluation (based on a structured
interview) of a person's skills.
- Attitude is more important than technical skill - a good DBA should look
at the big picture not just the technical detail of e.g. what is most
efficient for the database.
Daniel A. Morgan <damorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message
news:3C57E9CD.F85B8317_at_exesolutions.com...
> Thank you for feeling the need to add personal insults ("Then you're a
fool.
> Anyone with half a brain") to the group. Couldn't you have possibly posted
your
> opinion without dropping into the gutter?
>
> And I strongly disagree with your statement "Anyone with half a brain can
learn
> everything they need to know about Oracle in a single job in less than a
year".
> I doubt there is a single senior Oracle developer or DBA that feels they
learned
> everything they needed in three years. In fact the longer I work in Oracle
the
> more I realize I don't know.
>
> I'd also like to express my agreement with Tom Dyess when he states
> "Certification exams, ..., require you to know a ton of
> useless information." That is my opinion too. But not just certification
exams.
> Also those canned exams that are sold to HR departments that supposedly
help
> determine who is qualified and who is not. They are, at best, laughable.
>
> Daniel Morgan
>
>
>
> Keith Boulton wrote:
>
> > > there isn't anything to gain, why bother? If I had a choice of hiring
> > > someone with 4 years experience and OCP and someone with 10 years of
solid
> > > experience, I'd choose the latter every time. The problem with
> >
> > Then you're a fool. Anyone with half a brain can learn everything they
need
> > to know about Oracle in a single job in less than a year. The only other
> > thing they need to know is how to find out the stuff they don't yet know
as
> > and when they need it.
> >
> > After that, it's a matter of what's required for the job: oracle apps,
data
> > warehousing, how the client software interacts with the database...
> >
> > Most knowledge acquired more than 5 years ago is utterly irrelevant.
> >
> > There is no practical difference between 4 and 10 years experience - at
that
> > point, the issue is the difference between candidates' understanding,
talent
> > and motivation.
> >
> > I've worked with many people with 10 years experience which consisted of
the
> > first year repeated 10 times.
>
Received on Thu Jan 31 2002 - 02:41:37 CST
