Re: I'm seeking for OCP certification

From: Lewis C <lewisc_at_excite.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 23:42:22 GMT
Message-ID: <i3da81pal3qi2o88s8sjl8oig98vafmj7v_at_4ax.com>


On Fri, 13 May 2005 07:54:21 -0700, DA Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote:

>Lewis C wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't compare a DBA or developer to a surgeon or any other
>> medical profession. Very few DBAs have a job that could kill someone.
>
>I have heard this argument before and it is absolutely untrue. Lets
>examine the facts.
>
>The biggest Oracle installations on the planet (from a US standpoint as
>I can't speak for other countries) are at Homeland Security, FBI, NSA,
>and CIA. A mistake can be fatal ... not just to one person ... but
>potentially to thousands or millions.
>
>All hospitals have databases used for everything from scheduling
>surgical facilities to running their pharmacies. Want to bet whether an
>error can have fatal results?
>
>How about the databases controlling maintenance of airplanes? Willing to
>bet your life on it?
>
>And I could go on with thousands of other examples.
>
>But even if fatal consequences are not associated with databases where
>do you think your credit card information is held? Your bank accounts?
>Your income tax records? How happy would your life be if your stock
>broker had a little problem in their system and transferred your
>retirement funds to my account?
>
>But your argument also doesn't hold water in that the average family
>physician, dentist, pharmacist never stands between life and death in
>their day-to-day practice and yet all are licensed? How many attorneys
>deal with life-and-death issues? Not all bridges fell down before civil
>engineers were licensed? Not all airplanes crashed before aerospace
>engineering was properly santioned. Were the Wright Brothers licensed?
>Would you want the engineers at Boeing and Airbus to be winging it the
>same way? Sorry I just can't buy this argument. Oft repeated but never
>backed up with fact.
>
>> Or that will make a building or a bridge fall down, for that matter.
>> Other than that, I mostly agree.
>
>Having ranted a bit above ... I feel slightly chagrined now reading
>this ... but I'll leave the above intact with only slight misgivings.
>
>> On 1 and 2: For Oracle's test from Thompson, I found the questions to
>> be fairly well written and technically correct. There were a few that
>> could interpreted different ways. I really think they try to do a
>> good job on this. The tests go through a beta period and they are
>> updated over time.
>
>I agree: They try. The problem is they don't succeed and as Jonathan
>Lewis and others have pointed out repeatedly here they don't succeed
>in far too many cases.
>
>> On 3: I completely agree. At least a C level. What's that, 85%?
> >
>> On 4: I'm not sure how that would be tested. Also, there should a
>> progression. Drop OCA, OCP and OCM and switch to Junior level cert,
>> senior cert, journeyman, etc. Have a baseline test and then make it
>> harder and longer for higher levels.
>
>Using the model of the medical boards as an example here is one way I
>would test a DBA for competence.
>
>Take the DBA candidate into a room with 6 single-proc Oracle servers.
>Each server is running Oracle and has a different problem. One might
>be missing a control file, another have a corrupt log file, another
>someone to a hex editor to the System tablespace, etc. Instruct the
>DBA candidate to choose any 3 machines and:
>1. Properly diagnose the problem
>2. Fix it
>3. Bring it back on line with as much recovery as is possible
>4. If recovery is not complete explain why
>
>Would it be difficult? You bet.
>Would it be profitable for someone giving the test? Not the point.
>Would those that passed be technically competent? Provably so.
>
>> On 5: I didn't know that occurred. Does Oracle sell the answers?
>
>No but others do and Oracle should sue.
>
>> And on 6: Prohibitively expensive to grade.
>
>My point exactly. Certification should not be about profitability and
>will never have any meaning so long as that is part of the criteria.
>But look at my example, above. Cost of grading = $0.
>
>> You come from academia so I think your viewpoint on expense will
>> probably be different than mine. I don't think a certification should
>> be unattainable for most people, and that includes the cost.
>> Not just
>> the cost of the test (and I think $125 is very fair) but also the
>> costs of training material. I do think someone should have a few
>> years before they can be designated senior. I don't think they should
>> have to pay $2500.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lewis
>
>I think a reasonable cost is in the $2500 range. That is what medical
>students currently pay and that is after incurring many years of
>expensive education that no developer or DBA has done. Further, first
>year physicians make less money than DBAs so, if anything, the DBA is
>in a position to pay far more.
>
>But you miss the point. This isn't about the DBA or their money. Quite
>frankly the personal comfort of the DBA is irrelevant to certification.
>It is about employers having a level of confidence in the competence of
>those they hire just as you go to a licensed physician or surgeon or
>attorney because you want to know you too are in good hands. If you had
>a problem with your taxes and the IRS would you want me handling them
>for you, however well meaning, or would you prefer a CPA or tax
>attorney?
>
>The point of certification for engineers, dentists, pharmacists, any
>other profession is proof of competence. $125, about the cost of what?
>a few tickets to a baseball game? Is an insult to the concept.
>Certification, if it exists, must have both meaning and value. And I
>would expect that if real certification existed those with it would be
>able to command substantially higher salaries thus repaying the cost of
>the required education and testing.

[Quoted] Well thought out and well written.

I still wouldn't compare moving my retirement funds to your account the equivalent of someone dying but it would really piss me off. heh I have to concede you the point. I wasn't trying to defend incompetent DBAs just making a distinction.

[Quoted] You lost me when you mentioned attorneys though. The only good lawayer is a...Well you get the idea. ;-)

[Quoted] As far as the OCP goes, I personally found the tests to be accurate. It's the scoring that makes it too easy. And I would still recommend it for those wanting to get started or those with some free time. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Quoted] I like your ideas on testing but it sounds a lot like the OCM. Two issues:

  1. If we are going for no profit, Oracle wouldn't (or shouldn't) be [Quoted] the one to give the test. We would need to create a beauraracy to do the certs. I guess someone like ACM could do it but it would be a mammoth undertaking to hit all of the specialties. I would be willing to pay more in annual dues to support it though. Especially if there were grants for deserving people. I think it would be way too expensive for most people though. [Quoted]
  2. That really does sound like the OCM. What certs would be [Quoted] [Quoted] available for the junior and somewhat experienced? There should be tiers (which does not exist now). The current OCA, OCP, OCM is crap. It should be re-developed for Junior, Senior and Journeyman and have work experience requirements and not training requirements. Although training might be used as part of work experience (not one to one). I think that would put it more in line with an apprenticeship paradigm and give it more meaning. I belive mentoring can solve more than certs can.

[Quoted] But I have to agree the curent system isn't the best. I know 2 people with the OCM who know absolutely nothing beyond what was required to get the OCM. I would be scared to put them on a production system.

Lewis



Lewis R Cunningham

Author, ItToolBox Blog: An Expert's Guide to Oracle http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/oracle/guide/

Topic Editor, Suite101.com: Oracle Database http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/oracle

Sign up for courses here:
http://www.suite101.com/suiteu/default.cfm/416752


Received on Sat May 14 2005 - 01:42:22 CEST

Original text of this message