Re: Death of the DBA

From: Mladen Gogala <>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:28:19 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <h6k13j$1j3$>

On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 07:07:57 -0700, Helma wrote:

> Perhaps you don't see any threat to the Oracle DBA.

I don't.

> Others who disagree might talk about the steady march of the MSsql
> database,

They also might check into Betty Ford clinic for a detox. MS SQL is is linked to a single platform and it remains tied to that platform. Windows is on desks, not in the server rooms. Databases are usually in the server rooms, except if we are talking about databases servicing fantasy football.

> the increasing database work going to India,

The problem with the databases is that they usually contain vital company data. Most of the serious companies would think twice before moving the critical data overseas. I know of no bank or health insurance company that would allow its crucial business database(s) to be dislocated. What goes to India is development, not DBA work.

> the selfmanaging databases etc.
> I

Self-managing databases? Like those who obey Asimov's 3 laws? Here is how the 3 laws would look for databases:

A database may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm unless the being starts asking silly questions about the purpose and the fate of the DBA. The database should occassionally annoy human beings, just to remind them of its importance.

A database must obey the orders given to it by the DBA. In case of doubt, re-read the previous sentence.

A database must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or the Second Law.

What are "self-managing databases"? Do they exist in the "paperless office"? Dave, you're killing me.

Received on Thu Aug 20 2009 - 12:28:19 CDT

Original text of this message