Ole Hansen wrote:
> Sybrand Bakker <postbus_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message news:<5rmr81hiiule2n9mpmmkq2htfafb50s5nb_at_4ax.com>...
>
>
>>You contradict yourself. On the one hand you state 'unfortunately' you
>>don't have a DBA, on the other hand you state you don't need him/her.
>>Obviously, the decision not to hire a DBA is pennywise poundfoolish,
>>especially as you are using a third party product to query the
>>database. And what if your database crashes?
>>
>
> You are of course right. Luckily i have never experienced a database
> crash, and i hope i newer will. If our database crashes, we have a
> 4-hours on-site-support agreement. Hopefully a DBA will arrive within
> 4 hours, and solve the problem.
>
> This means, that for 4 hours, our ERP-program will not run, which
> means no invoicing, no orderprocessing, no pick jobs in the warehouse
> etc. It will probaly cost us several thousand euros in lost workhours,
> since we are 500 employees in the company. But our management thinks,
> that this is an OK solution.
>
> So that's the way it is.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ole
Your assumption that "NEED DBA" equates with "CRASH" is woefully
incorrect. If crash recovery is the only thing anyone needed a DBA
for ... there wouldn't be more than a handful of them on the planet:
You folks should rethink this assumption before reality stomps on
you with both feet.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Received on Sat May 21 2005 - 16:22:40 CDT
