SQLServerCentral / Editorials / SQLServerCentral.com / Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve? / Latest Posts

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Phil Paxton — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:52:55 GMT

People often overlook the number the businesses of fairly small companies.This is from 2007/2008:http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.htmlThere's a lot of interesting info which comes out of census.gov.Even if you don't bookmark it, it's easy to find things like this with one or two trips to Google.Determine the percentage of businesses with fewer than 100 (or better: < 20!).Happy POETS Day!

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

katesl — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 07:52:32 GMT

A small business cannot hire an employee into every role that is defined by division of labor in a multinational corp. Some small businesses are successful as small businesses. Again-- it is crucial that the business managers design do-able job descriptions and recognize skillsets and gaps. Calling a whiz programmer who really doesn't understand business rules an "architect" is a managerial fault I have seen more than once. Don't assume all DBAs are programmers first. I am a very good DBA who was a data analyst before I was a DBA. Now I am expert in T-SQL, database tools and DBMS. I learned SQL Server because it was necessary to do the work with data that I love. I am an intelligent and informed user of Windows OSs but I am not qualified to be the Windows and network admin.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

GSquared — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:26:36 GMT

[quote][b]brad.featherstone (12/15/2011)[/b][hr]Sounds like you are used to a larger organization.Scale does matter. In the Small/Medium Business (SMB) world the person who fills the DBA role frequently fills the data analyst/statistician/etc.. role. And the vast majority of organizations out there are SMB.Brad ;-)[/quote]The problem with that is it's the same assumption as this: The janitor cleans the CEO's office, so that means the janitor is capable of running the company. It's always possible the janitor could be a perfectly valid CEO, but it's a bit of a stretch. Same for a DBA doing stat analysis and data mining, et al. Just because he's qualified to run backups, update stats, even normalize data, doesn't mean he knows how to analyze things like the differences between average and median, accuracy vs precision, percentiles, probabilities, causation vs correlation in demographics, et al.Lots of small businesses operate on the "he's good with computers and seems smart, so we'll make him the DBA, data analyst, statistician, and he can set up the phone system, handle tech support, and debug this Excel spreadsheet that keeps making my computer bluescreen". Sometimes, that's the best they can do. Often, that's the kind of thing that keeps them a small business always on the ragged edge of collapse, one bill ahead of bankruptcy. There are reasons 90% of all new businesses fail in the first year, and this kind of thing is one of them.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

brad.featherstone — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:17:13 GMT

Sounds like you are used to a larger organization.Scale does matter. In the Small/Medium Business (SMB) world the person who fills the DBA role frequently fills the data analyst/statistician/etc.. role. And the vast majority of organizations out there are SMB.Brad ;-)

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

geoswill — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:40:55 GMT

I really don't see the DBA as having any real role in the analysis, interpretation of data. This is more the province of the mathematicians, statisticians, domain experts who have the ability to portray the data in an interpretation / format usable for the required purpose. DBAs??? Don't think so.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

GSquared — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 06:47:58 GMT

[quote][b]Kevin Mao-243787 (12/13/2011)[/b][hr]Role of DBAsFour roles are listed in first Chapter of Professional Microsfot SQL Server 2008 Administration: Production DBA,Development DBA, Business Intelligence DBA & Hybrid DBA. For smaller organzations, Hybird DBA is very popular which has title as Program Analyst. If a program analyst can do some of DBA functions, why hire a DBA? [/quote]And why hire an accountant or lawyer? Surely some of their functions can be done by your sales clerks or even the janitor!

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Jeff Moden — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 19:04:50 GMT

[quote][b]Kevin Mao-243787 (12/13/2011)[/b][hr]Role of DBAsFour roles are listed in first Chapter of Professional Microsfot SQL Server 2008 Administration: Production DBA,Development DBA, Business Intelligence DBA & Hybrid DBA. For smaller organzations, Hybird DBA is very popular which has title as Program Analyst. If a program analyst can do [font="Arial Black"]some [/font]of DBA functions, why hire a DBA? [/quote]Not all Hybrid DBAs are called "Program Analysts". And you, yourself, have explained why you might still want to consider hiring a DBA... see the bolded word above. ;-)

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

jcrawf02 — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 18:58:24 GMT

[quote][b]Kevin Mao-243787 (12/13/2011)[/b][hr]Role of DBAsFour roles are listed in first Chapter of Professional Microsfot SQL Server 2008 Administration: Production DBA,Development DBA, Business Intelligence DBA & Hybrid DBA. For smaller organzations, Hybird DBA is very popular which has title as Program Analyst. If a program analyst can do some of DBA functions, why hire a DBA? [/quote]why build a home by hiring anyone else besides a general contractor? They can do some of the same duties?

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Kevin Mao-243787 — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:44:46 GMT

Role of DBAsFour roles are listed in first Chapter of Professional Microsfot SQL Server 2008 Administration: Production DBA,Development DBA, Business Intelligence DBA & Hybrid DBA. For smaller organzations, Hybird DBA is very popular which has title as Program Analyst. If a program analyst can do some of DBA functions, why hire a DBA?

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Evil Kraig F — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:13:55 GMT

[quote][b]TravisDBA (12/13/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Evil Kraig F (12/12/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]GSquared (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]You're probably thinking of the (much later) Feudal-period "bards". Same job title, but more entertainer than keeper of lore. That's a post-literate development. I was refering to the older job. [/quote]Dead in the black, you're right. I'd forgotten it was used as a descriptor of the Loremaster as well. Oops? :hehe:[/quote]Evil Kraig, I love your two sigs. The one person that I can think of that was extremely infamous for using both of these deceptions to his extreme advantage was Hitler. In the end though lies, deception, and manipulation only works just for awhile. :-D[/quote]Thanks for the compliment, appreciated. I have a number of other examples that if you'd like we'll discuss via PM. The only thing the other examples I have would do, at least in general, is start a flamewar.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

TravisDBA — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:08:54 GMT

[quote][b]Evil Kraig F (12/12/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]GSquared (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]You're probably thinking of the (much later) Feudal-period "bards". Same job title, but more entertainer than keeper of lore. That's a post-literate development. I was refering to the older job. [/quote]Dead in the black, you're right. I'd forgotten it was used as a descriptor of the Loremaster as well. Oops? :hehe:[/quote]Evil Kraig, I love your two sigs. The one person that I can think of that was extremely infamous for using both of these deceptions to his extreme advantage was Hitler. In the end though lies, deception, and manipulation only works just for awhile. :-D

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

jlcarroll — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:06:17 GMT

Well, by hiring contract, I always support the 24x7 database operations. The DBA role is only for database maintaining and for helping of the data analyst and application programmers, be Web or be Desktop or be Server Programmers, whoever want to access to a database. This is the "[i]caretaker[/i]" role. However, with the adoption of the Business Intelligence wave, DBA are certainly implied into Data Analyst teamwork. But, DBA must maintain the essential principles, and to avoid increase the complexity in a well-formed complexity named "databases" world, where companies will grow more and more and the efficient of engines may be altered. The natural evolution could address to the incorporation of new techniques to [i]decrease [/i]the database management, and to aid of discovering and understand new data analysis methods.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Evil Kraig F — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:52:13 GMT

[quote][b]GSquared (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]You're probably thinking of the (much later) Feudal-period "bards". Same job title, but more entertainer than keeper of lore. That's a post-literate development. I was refering to the older job. [/quote]Dead in the black, you're right. I'd forgotten it was used as a descriptor of the Loremaster as well. Oops? :hehe:

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

GSquared — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:27:30 GMT

[quote][b]Evil Kraig F (12/12/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]GSquared (12/12/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]michael.french 172 (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]An exponential advance in technology is an understatement. Think of how far we come in just the last 50 years or even five years. Think about how young this World Wide Interweb thingy is. Does anyone remember UUNet? How about Windows NT not being a stable enough platform to build a business application? Twitter is barely 5 years old and built on 140 characters. It is amazing in both its simplicity and contribution to information.Look at your parents and think about the technology advances that they have seen. My mother still cries when she has to touch a computer because she is afraid that she will break it. Now consider how your children view technology and the advances in technology that they will see in their lifetime. I am still amazed that I can send an email from my SQL Server and have it show up in three different locations at the same time including my smart phone with a dual core processor. Think for a minute about the complexity of that operation.There is one thing that I was taught early in my career from an old DBA, design every database to last thirty years including prototypes. It is that type of long term thinking that helps us out as DBA’s. Developers and End Users want to see the data now. We have to see the data as it will be in the years to come. It is one of the skills that set us apart.There will always be a need for the Keepers of Data just as there always has been throughout Human History. We just use new and improved tools.[/quote]"Keepers of Data" used to be called "Librarians" and "File Clerks". Before that, "Storytellers" or "Bards" and "Historians" and "Priests". Before that, "Oog" (I think that was his name, anyway :-P ). Same societal function, different tools for doing the work.[/quote]No, it was "Bob". It always comes back to Bob in the end... and the beginning. That and sheep.However, up until recently with us and File Clerks, I'd slightly disagree with the statement. These were the keepers of stories and morals. Even Bards chose and wrote their songs for political statement instead of strict information. I might be picking at the threads of the argument though, you're correct in general.To the point: No, I don't think DBAs as guardians of data will become the interpreters. There's too many 'experts' out there, alongside real experts, who will be the ones to interpret our safehouses of information. We'll become the equivalent of the "Chosen Guardians at the gates to the Library of Babylon" or some such. We're not there to help you make sense of it, though we can try. We're there to make sure it's undamaged when you're done for the next person.[/quote]Keep in mind that, in Celtic society and a number of related cultures, "Bard" and "Lorekeeper" were both the same job. They memorized geneologies, histories, treaties with other tribes/nations, marriages, et al. Most pre-literate cultures have a similar job, just the title changes.In that way, these people were "keepers and guardians of data". They just memorized it instead of writing it down. Since these are pre-literate cultures, writing it down wasn't an option, and memorizing makes more sense in that context. (Socrates worried that literacy would be a curse on Greek culture, since it seemed to ruin young men's ability to memorize the kind of vast amounts of data that he was accustomed to.)You're probably thinking of the (much later) Feudal-period "bards". Same job title, but more entertainer than keeper of lore. That's a post-literate development. I was refering to the older job. By the time the job had changed, the Church was the primary keeper of records, and everything was pretty much being written by them. Though accountants had also taken some of the role by that time, of course. But many accountants were illiterate, and operated on semi-written records (hash marks and logos instead of written numbers and words).

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Evil Kraig F — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:19:10 GMT

[quote][b]GSquared (12/12/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]michael.french 172 (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]An exponential advance in technology is an understatement. Think of how far we come in just the last 50 years or even five years. Think about how young this World Wide Interweb thingy is. Does anyone remember UUNet? How about Windows NT not being a stable enough platform to build a business application? Twitter is barely 5 years old and built on 140 characters. It is amazing in both its simplicity and contribution to information.Look at your parents and think about the technology advances that they have seen. My mother still cries when she has to touch a computer because she is afraid that she will break it. Now consider how your children view technology and the advances in technology that they will see in their lifetime. I am still amazed that I can send an email from my SQL Server and have it show up in three different locations at the same time including my smart phone with a dual core processor. Think for a minute about the complexity of that operation.There is one thing that I was taught early in my career from an old DBA, design every database to last thirty years including prototypes. It is that type of long term thinking that helps us out as DBA’s. Developers and End Users want to see the data now. We have to see the data as it will be in the years to come. It is one of the skills that set us apart.There will always be a need for the Keepers of Data just as there always has been throughout Human History. We just use new and improved tools.[/quote]"Keepers of Data" used to be called "Librarians" and "File Clerks". Before that, "Storytellers" or "Bards" and "Historians" and "Priests". Before that, "Oog" (I think that was his name, anyway :-P ). Same societal function, different tools for doing the work.[/quote]No, it was "Bob". It always comes back to Bob in the end... and the beginning. That and sheep.However, up until recently with us and File Clerks, I'd slightly disagree with the statement. These were the keepers of stories and morals. Even Bards chose and wrote their songs for political statement instead of strict information. I might be picking at the threads of the argument though, you're correct in general.To the point: No, I don't think DBAs as guardians of data will become the interpreters. There's too many 'experts' out there, alongside real experts, who will be the ones to interpret our safehouses of information. We'll become the equivalent of the "Chosen Guardians at the gates to the Library of Babylon" or some such. We're not there to help you make sense of it, though we can try. We're there to make sure it's undamaged when you're done for the next person.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

GSquared — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:09:37 GMT

[quote][b]michael.french 172 (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]An exponential advance in technology is an understatement. Think of how far we come in just the last 50 years or even five years. Think about how young this World Wide Interweb thingy is. Does anyone remember UUNet? How about Windows NT not being a stable enough platform to build a business application? Twitter is barely 5 years old and built on 140 characters. It is amazing in both its simplicity and contribution to information.Look at your parents and think about the technology advances that they have seen. My mother still cries when she has to touch a computer because she is afraid that she will break it. Now consider how your children view technology and the advances in technology that they will see in their lifetime. I am still amazed that I can send an email from my SQL Server and have it show up in three different locations at the same time including my smart phone with a dual core processor. Think for a minute about the complexity of that operation.There is one thing that I was taught early in my career from an old DBA, design every database to last thirty years including prototypes. It is that type of long term thinking that helps us out as DBA’s. Developers and End Users want to see the data now. We have to see the data as it will be in the years to come. It is one of the skills that set us apart.There will always be a need for the Keepers of Data just as there always has been throughout Human History. We just use new and improved tools.[/quote]"Keepers of Data" used to be called "Librarians" and "File Clerks". Before that, "Storytellers" or "Bards" and "Historians" and "Priests". Before that, "Oog" (I think that was his name, anyway :-P ). Same societal function, different tools for doing the work.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

TravisDBA — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:08:51 GMT

Analyzing business data versus administering it tends to fall under the "Business Intelligence" umbrella in most shops with BA's that specialize in exactly that kind of "slicing and dicing" of data analysis. Now, with that said, do I see DBA's picking up or even inheriting that role as they evolve through the natural course of daily business needs. Definitely. :-D In my shop I have a saying that says "I draw the line at cleaning bathrooms.":w00t:

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

michael.french 172 — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:02:45 GMT

An exponential advance in technology is an understatement. Think of how far we come in just the last 50 years or even five years. Think about how young this World Wide Interweb thingy is. Does anyone remember UUNet? How about Windows NT not being a stable enough platform to build a business application? Twitter is barely 5 years old and built on 140 characters. It is amazing in both its simplicity and contribution to information.Look at your parents and think about the technology advances that they have seen. My mother still cries when she has to touch a computer because she is afraid that she will break it. Now consider how your children view technology and the advances in technology that they will see in their lifetime. I am still amazed that I can send an email from my SQL Server and have it show up in three different locations at the same time including my smart phone with a dual core processor. Think for a minute about the complexity of that operation.There is one thing that I was taught early in my career from an old DBA, design every database to last thirty years including prototypes. It is that type of long term thinking that helps us out as DBA’s. Developers and End Users want to see the data now. We have to see the data as it will be in the years to come. It is one of the skills that set us apart.There will always be a need for the Keepers of Data just as there always has been throughout Human History. We just use new and improved tools.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

TechnoPeasant — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:04:27 GMT

A new field of study "Culturomics" and a new job description "Data Scientist"

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Jason Selburg — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 11:02:08 GMT

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Craig-315134 — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:56:31 GMT

Brad McGehee wrote:[i]I was making the assumption that over a long period of time, 50, 100, 500 years, that the role of DBA administrator would probably go away as software could very possibly take over such tasks.[/i]It's nice to know someone is optimistic about our longer-term prospects, both as IT professionals and as human beings!I think the changes you envision might come about sooner than the timescale you suggest; but I also wonder if, for them to happen, the nature of higher education needs also change, so as to encourage the coalescing of what presently seem to be very disparate professions.The philosophy of some educational systems, such as that in the US, encourages a broad approach to learning - so that even IT and engineering majors are exposed to some degree to the liberal arts.Others, as in the UK and Germany, point the student toward a high degree of specialisation at a fairly early age.Although the American educational system has its critics - many of them deserved - I think its concern for producing a well-rounded student actually would better foster the changes you suggest, than some of the other educational approaches.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

GSquared — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:53:21 GMT

[quote][b]bradmcgehee@hotmail.com (12/12/2011)[/b][hr]My editorial got edited after I wrote it, and one important part of the message I was trying to get across apparently got deleted. In the original draft of my editorial, I was making the assumption that over a long period of time, 50, 100, 500 years, that the role of DBA administrator would probably go away as software could very possibly take over such tasks. So my question "Will the DBA role evolve naturally from being a "caretaker of data", to "interpreter of data", for the good of society?" is not asking about now, or the next few years, but about the future. The goal of the editorial was to be "whimsical" and "thought-provoking", but that part of the editorial got edited out.[/quote]I guess the data in the editorial wasn't properly safeguarded, eh? :-PAnd, yes, as systems evolve and become more self-correcting, et al, the duties of dealing with them will change. It's been a long time, for example, since I had to administer a Windows for Workgroups 3.11 network on a thin-coax token ring. That set of skills isn't really applicable any more. At the same time, building and administering a more modern network hasn't become simpler, it's just become different. I think database administration will go the same way. Years ago, backup/restore administration, and the details of restoring a database from tape backups of full, diff and log data, to a point in time, was a complex skillset. Now, I generally pick the database in SSMS, right-click, open the restore wizard, pick the point in time in a field, and click "Okay". Flash drives are in the process of eliminating fragmentation (physical and index) as a consideration. But DBAing has become a more complex skillset, not less.So, yeah, the skills will change. It's just a question of how much.As for 500-year time spans, who knows? 500 years ago was the 1600s. The printing press had revolutionized data dissemination, but it was still primarily being stored (outside the human head) in ink-on-paper, and analysis was a matter of decades of education. Modern ideas of electronic storage and retrieval would have been inconceivable. Not only outside of what could be imagined, but outside of any need that could be imagined. 500 years ago, Adam Smith was over 100 years in the future, and John Meynard Keynes was over 400 years away. Modern business and government weren't even a twinkle in their fathers' eyes, as it were. And those two (government and modern business) are the two biggest driving forces behind data storage, dissemination, et al.So, 500 years from now? I'm sure it will be radically different, but I'm also sure it will still required skilled people [i]somewhere[/i] in the mix, not just more automation.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

OCTom — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:50:46 GMT

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

OCTom — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:47:19 GMT

I hesitate to have DBA's interpret data. Particularly data in fields such as medical and finance. I have a difficult enough time understanding how to store, manipulate, backup data, and report against data. One can't be all things to all people.There is also the need for separation of responsibilities. It is a bad idea to have the data caretakers also be the data interpreters. I think it would be bad, and maybe against the law, to have the same person perform both roles in a financial institution.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

katesl — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:43:55 GMT

Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) does require separation of responsibilities. Application developers are not allowed to "fix" production data. I can't disagree with this. But I never forget the quote Stamp's Statistical Probability The government [is] extremely fond of amassing great quantities of statistics. These are raised to the nth degree, the cube roots are extracted, and the results are arranged into elaborate and impressive displays. What must be kept ever in mind, however, is that in every case, the figures are first put down by a village watchman, and he puts down anything he damn well pleases.(Attributed to Sir Josiah Stamp, 1840-1941, H.M. collector of inland revenue.As DBA, I do validity checks as far back to the source as I can on data I protect, and I am always interested in analyzing the data I am protecting. I was a data analyst, not a programmer, before I was a DBA. And I am a good DBA, with a good understanding of how much time any database operation (and human operation) should require. I "get" the SQL Server DBMS. Some programmers know all the trees and don't get the forest.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

katesl — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:42:17 GMT

The function of calculating storage space for the data and making sure it's backed up-- and that restore works!-- is a crucial function-- but one that is very easy to perform with the SQL Server toolset. It isn't a fulltime job, and in my case combines very naturally with database design, query planning and index "design." In the Ingres days, there were fine points of index design to master; now it's simply "which index should be the clustered index?" plus "is the read benefit of this index worth the write cost?"-- leaving more time for investigation/validation of data relationships.The general point that job functions may be too broad (pilot has to be rested) or too narrow (overspecialized out of existence) calls for analysis of WHICH job functions should be combined. I think the combining of user interface design with database design is a mistake, and of course object-oriented programmers disagree with me. I was an entry-level statistician before I became a database programmer/DBA, and I saw some wild misconceptions from PhD statisticians who did know how to analyze data relationships but weren't familiar with the database design and thus didn't know what was in their data. For instance-- assumption that the table named "employees" held records for all employees when a look at the database diagram might have raised the question "what's in the table employees_former_contract?" And, without a DBA familiar with the business use of the data, there is no sanity check on database size. I've worked with DBA/network administrators quite proud of their facility in managing large and growing data volumes; then I look at the database and see that 90 percent of it is redundant and whitespace.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

bradmcgehee@hotmail.com — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:44:11 GMT

My editorial got edited after I wrote it, and one important part of the message I was trying to get across apparently got deleted. In the original draft of my editorial, I was making the assumption that over a long period of time, 50, 100, 500 years, that the role of DBA administrator would probably go away as software could very possibly take over such tasks. So my question "Will the DBA role evolve naturally from being a "caretaker of data", to "interpreter of data", for the good of society?" is not asking about now, or the next few years, but about the future. The goal of the editorial was to be "whimsical" and "thought-provoking", but that part of the editorial got edited out.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Craig-315134 — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:21:01 GMT

There's a real difference between the DBA and DA roles. And the DA role which Brad McGehee suggests seem to live at the junction of IT and many of the social sciences - the latter not being something with which today's DA (much less DBA) is usually familiar.In our shop - part of a public agency - most of the analytics and data mining is actually conducted by the GIS staff. We are fortunate to have a tried, true, and trusty DBA who excels at providing the data to GIS - and it seems likely these roles will remain unchanged here into the foreseeable future.Yours truly,Hari Seldon=)

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

GSquared — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 07:54:13 GMT

I agree with the split. DBA = admins the database, Management = analyzes data and makes+implements decisions based on it, Analyst = support for management when specialized knowledge/skills are needed to turn data into information.Conflating the functions is a mistake. We don't have managers (generally) who are expected to maintain the air conditioner for their office, so why expect them to admin a database or server? And we don't expect the HVAC engineer to analyze the company, the markets, the government, et al, and make decisions about the business.I've been in both positions (DBA and management; I haven't done HVAC work in over a decade), and they require complex and different skillsets and knowledge. Managers are the ones who have to analyze data and turn it into information that can be used for planning (or reacting, depending on the urgency). Sometimes (often) they need help on that from people who are trained in areas like statistics, but that's the role of a researcher, not a DBA (DB Admin, not DB Analyst). Those are people who deal with determining correlation vs causation, et al. It's mainly stats, scientific methodology, etc. Again, they don't need to know how to design a good database (relational or cubes or whatever), they need to know how to spot relations in complex data. "Customers who buy toothpaste also often buy dental floss" has a probable causal relationship to interest in personal hygiene, vs "Customers who buy diapers also often buy beer", which turned out to be a correlation with no real causal relationship (real-life data mining scenario). That's not something based on classical DBA skills, like normalization, SARGability, b-tree indexing, et al, or DR, backups, log shipping, replication, et al, depending on which version of DBA you mean.Specialists cost more, but have the opportunity to be better at what they do. I view that as a positive thing.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

jcrawf02 — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 07:23:30 GMT

[quote][b]Jeff Moden (12/11/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]From the article:[/b][hr]Will the DBA role evolve naturally from being a "caretaker of data", to "interpreter of data", for the good of society?[/quote]I believe that anyone who doesn't already think so, has missed the proverbial boat. :-)[/quote]Wherefore, good sir? I think each role has so much importance that to combine the two might dilute the results. Making sure that such large volumes of data are available, backed up, up to date and consistent seems as important in the future as it is today (only becoming more so as you deal with more and more data). On the other hand, a true understanding of the data without having to worry about where and when it is stored is required to make business decisions, and time taken to do both of those things takes away from the value of whichever one is your primary goal. I would think it similar to a fighter jet; you want your pilot to be rested and ready to fly the damn thing, not worry about upkeep, that's the mechanic's job. Both highly specialized, both vital, not a crossover position.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

andagr — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:26:04 GMT

[quote][b]katesl (12/10/2011)[/b][hr]I worked at a university as a data analyst using statistical software in 1983-- yes, 1983. I struggled to manage data relationships using SPSS. Then I was introduced to Ingres 1.0. Relational database has been my credo and my paycheck since then, with statistical software and Excel in supporting roles. Even though the Ingres database server crashed too frequently and it was my job as DBA to recover from crashes and work to prevent them, I was recognized as knowledgeable about data as well as database server. I taught relational database design and index design for Computer Associates in the mid-1990s. I work on short term contracts, mostly fixing SQL Server problems created by application developers who may be good application programmers, but not database programmers. Microsoft created a monster by presenting SQL Server as a room in the Visual Studio rather than supporting the role of the DBA as separate from the role of application developer. True, the programming built into SQL Server eliminated the need for a dedicated DBA to manage the database server and databases, but what role understands the data relationships? Typically, application developers do not recognize or respect many-to-many relations-- for instance. A data-oriented DBA is a much better database designer than is the combination of a business analyst working with an business-intelligence-challenged application developer. Companies that hire me typically expect that I will make a fix to how SQL Server DBMS works on Windows and their hardware -- "tuning." Typically, they don't welcome a demonstration that performance can be improved dramatically by teaching database programming to their application developers. (Really now, do you think it's more likely SQL Server and Windows fit together badly or that your application is not using SQL Server optimally? How many programmer analysts does Microsoft employ, and how many big applications has your lead developer delivered?) Object-oriented programming ("data is dead but must be persisted when not being viewed through this application") and security-mandated separation of development from production have pretty much succeeded in persuading IT managers that data is owned by applications and the database is just a box. >>Will the DBA role evolve naturally from being a "caretaker of data", to "interpreter of data"? I would like the DBA role to RETURN to include "interpreter of data."[/quote]Great post, I agree with this.

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Jeff Moden — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 09:23:07 GMT

[quote][b]From the article:[/b][hr]Will the DBA role evolve naturally from being a "caretaker of data", to "interpreter of data", for the good of society?[/quote]I believe that anyone who doesn't already think so, has missed the proverbial boat. :-)

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

katesl — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 20:09:16 GMT

I worked at a university as a data analyst using statistical software in 1983-- yes, 1983. I struggled to manage data relationships using SPSS. Then I was introduced to Ingres 1.0. Relational database has been my credo and my paycheck since then, with statistical software and Excel in supporting roles. Even though the Ingres database server crashed too frequently and it was my job as DBA to recover from crashes and work to prevent them, I was recognized as knowledgeable about data as well as database server. I taught relational database design and index design for Computer Associates in the mid-1990s. I work on short term contracts, mostly fixing SQL Server problems created by application developers who may be good application programmers, but not database programmers. Microsoft created a monster by presenting SQL Server as a room in the Visual Studio rather than supporting the role of the DBA as separate from the role of application developer. True, the programming built into SQL Server eliminated the need for a dedicated DBA to manage the database server and databases, but what role understands the data relationships? Typically, application developers do not recognize or respect many-to-many relations-- for instance. A data-oriented DBA is a much better database designer than is the combination of a business analyst working with an business-intelligence-challenged application developer. Companies that hire me typically expect that I will make a fix to how SQL Server DBMS works on Windows and their hardware -- "tuning." Typically, they don't welcome a demonstration that performance can be improved dramatically by teaching database programming to their application developers. (Really now, do you think it's more likely SQL Server and Windows fit together badly or that your application is not using SQL Server optimally? How many programmer analysts does Microsoft employ, and how many big applications has your lead developer delivered?) Object-oriented programming ("data is dead but must be persisted when not being viewed through this application") and security-mandated separation of development from production have pretty much succeeded in persuading IT managers that data is owned by applications and the database is just a box. >>Will the DBA role evolve naturally from being a "caretaker of data", to "interpreter of data"? I would like the DBA role to RETURN to include "interpreter of data."

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

brad.featherstone — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:10:19 GMT

Yup, We be plumbers. But, in medium/small businesses the goal has always been to deliver information, not just data.I am currently I am working with a large group of superstar analysts. The only issue is that they are superstars at a very narrow body of knowledge. The end result is that there will always be a need for generalists that can get the job done when it is needed, [u]without[/u] highly specialized domain knowledge.So, IMHO, the editorial is sorta off the mark to begin with. Us SMB DB monkeys have always had to curate data and always have had to deliver usable information.BradDo not forget that overspecialization has usually led to extinction. ;-)

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Phil Paxton — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 18:35:18 GMT

There's another source of endless information which doesn't seem to be mentioned very often: Twitter has a deal for every Tweet to be archived at the LOC (Library of Congress). That'll easily outweigh the Google 20 Year Usenet Timeline (http://www.google.com/googlegroups/archive_announce_20.html)

RE: Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

Steve Marak — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 13:24:44 GMT

The DBA will continue to be the "plumber" getting the data to the superstars who analyze it. Can you depend on the interpreters of the information to manage the pumps and pipes? I doubt it. They are different tasks.That said, I watch the data and try to understand its relevance and measure its integrity. I can't meet the consumers of the data halfway otherwise.It's refreshing when they meet me halfway too, and I reach out to them. But when they don't respond I am not surprised, just disappointed. (Frequently they are disappointed too, eventually.)

Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?

bradmcgehee@hotmail.com — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 11:13:50 GMT

Comments posted to this topic are about the item [B]Does the Role of the DBA Need to Evolve?[/B]