Re: Career questions: databases

Larry Linson wrote:
> "DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_psoug.org> wrote
>
> > In the learning curve of all skills and technologies
> > there is a point where one begins and they know
> > they know nothing.
>
> Before there was any software product category for "databases," I remember
> hearing the following definition:
>
> Generalist: One who learns less and less about more
> and more until he knows nothing about everything.
> Specialist: One who learns more and more about less
> and less until he knows everything about nothing.
>
> Keep us advised as to when Bob is coming to the meeting; I need a good
> reason to come to Seattle, anyway. :-)
>
> In a previous incarnation as a mainframer with a major computer
> manufacturer, I sometimes had the chore of reviewing applications and
> recommending who my manager should interview. I surely passed on a lot of
> them which claimed more knowledge than was possible, just as you said. I
> was in a contracting group in that company and our skills inventory had
> several levels -- most of us didn't even bother to put down the "1" level,
> which only meant that you'd heard of the product and had a pretty good idea
> what it was intended to do. It was a long time ago, and I forget whether
> the top level was 5 or 10, but it meant that you had sufficient knowledge to
> modify the internals of the software product. Anybody who had more than a
> very few products marked at that level was automatically suspect for
> "bragging".
>
> There's a lifetime of effort, I am certain, to simply maintain competence
> with Oracle, much less to reach a level where people regard you as "expert."
> And most of the people I regard as "expert" in various disciplines prefer
> not to be called "expert", in any case.
>
> Larry
>
>
>

I'd go along with that but maybe qualify it so it is clear that there is a difference between expert modification of product internals and "expert", eg., safe, use of a product.

At one time, I regularly met programmers, usually younger than thirty but sometimes over forty, who would claim to have written a million lines of assembler. When challenged, it was clear that most had not put even 50,000 lines into production apps and it was also clear that not being able to count would make them dangerous as system programmers. However I strongly suspect that the SQL specification being as monstrous as it is, some of those people may have ended up writing, say, Oracle engine code.

That was about the time I was reading a book that I think may have been called "On Thinking" by a guy whose name might have been Laszlo. Lost it years ago and have never been able to find another copy, let alone an ISBN. As I recall, he described how elite chess masters could only play chess, not teach it, because they could no longer explain what an expert does at that level. Just wondering if anybody knows of this book because I would like to find it again.

(BTW, I'm up for Seattle too, but I think it is presumptuous to demand that Bob B hold forth. I would go just to hear him ask questions from the audience. Also it would be a pleasure for me as I like the parts of Seattle I know and I wonder if the meeting could be sooner, say around the time of the AmeriVespa weekend. I could be there on several hours notice, assuming I can get across the border. Oh, it's also presumptuous because I think when you challenge people this way, they should be offered a decent per diem. What's "decent" is like who is "expert", but I do remember that Codd's per diem about fifteen years ago was USD 14,000 plus expenses.)

p Received on Sun Jul 01 2007 - 02:42:27 CEST