Re: So what if 8i is outta support ?

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:50:48 -0700
Message-ID: <1099100987.913482@yasure>

Access wrote:

> "Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
> news:417afd2e$0$19059$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
>

>>David Sharples wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
>>>news:1098563500.920932_at_yasure...
>>>
>>>>Robert wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>8i is outta support 12-31-2004, correct ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Is it such a "big deal" or horror to be running 8i after that date ?
>>>>
>>>>Only if in 5 years you expect to be fully qualified to flip burgers
>>>>for a living.
>>>>
>>>>Last week I was interviewing PL/SQL developers. No one whose experience
>>>>was 8i (and not 9i) was even considered. Next week I begin interviewing
>>>>DBA candidates. Those whose primary experience is 8i won't get past
>>>>having their resumes tossed into the recycling.
>>>>--
>>>>Daniel A. Morgan
>>>>University of Washington
>>>>damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
>>>>(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>>>
>>>features can be learned.  I would much rather employ someone who has the
>>>capacity to learn who knows basic concepts well.  By tossing away
>>>candidates just because their current employer doesn't use 9i or you are
>>>possibly missing out on some excellent people
>>>
>>>but thats just my opinion
>>
>>And an entirely sensible one, if you ask me.
>>
>>I'd employ a SQL Server user if he showed a bit of get-up-and-go, a
>>willingness to learn, a willingness to research, a desire for precision

>
> and
>

>>facts. Point of fact, I did once employ a database instructor who had
>>worked his entire career previously in Quark Xpress page design. And he
>>turned into the best instructor I ever employed.
>>
>>It is as utterly daft in my book to toss out a CV because it doesn't

>
> mention
>

>>9i as it is to toss IN one because it contains the magic letters 'OCP'.
>>
>>Regards
>>HJR
>>

>
>
> Just want to add my 2 eurocents (like anyone cares, ha ! - sorry that was a
> joke).
>
> I'm currently working as a DBA/sysadmin for a federal institute here in
> Belgium. We are running Oracle 8.1.7 on AIX 4.3.3 with HACMP. So no Oracle
> 9i, no "cool" RAC's, no 64-bit Linux, ... yet ! (well we have one smallish
> Oracle 9i db that's not worth looking at, still it's fun to play with its
> spfile ;-)).
>
> So I guess I don't know really that much about Oracle 9i, let alone Oracle
> 10g ... Of course I read a lot about the new features, of course I tried
> things at home, but it's just not the same "experience" if you can't use it
> in a "real" situation. Why we haven't done the upgrade yet ? The typical
> answers : "it's running stable now, don't touch it!","do we really need
> those new features ?", afraid of too much downtime, hardware
> incompatibilities (IBM hardware = expensive hardware) etc. When are we
> planning to upgrade ? Second half of 2005 ...
> So do I consider myself a "bad" and "out-of-date" Oracle DBA ? Maybe ... I'm
> still learning a lot though, and most of all : I still CARE about "my"
> databases and i'm still happy to help any developer to find a solution for
> their Oracle problems. So should I search for a new job in a technologically
> more advanced environment ? Maybe ... well the perfect job for me would
> involve Oracle 9i/10g + Linux in an academic environment, but it's very hard
> to find (and get !) such a job here in Belgium ...
>
> Just my thoughts,
> Matthias

As you may have seen in another thread I posted ... I just picked up a public corporation with Oracle 7.3.3. They are mandated by Federal Law to implement auditing of every DML statement constructed by SYS, SYSTEM, and anyone with DBA privs. Their excuse was the same ... now they have auditors breathing down their back. Had they kept current they would have spent less money. Far less money. And every public corporation, and many others in the US, will have to do this in the very near future or risk criminal penalties.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Received on Fri Oct 29 2004 - 20:50:48 CDT