SQLServerCentral Article

Why Redgate is Running a Database Development Disasters Contest?

,

It’s like Fred without Ginger. The Avengers without Captain America. Ren without Stimpy.

We all hear day in, day out how DevOps is transforming organizations around the world. Helping to create collaboration across teams, improve processes, and deliver feature-rich software, faster than ever before.

But…among all the tales of the benefits delivered, do you have the proof points to show your organization the precarious consequences of leaving the database out? Or the evidence to show the marginal performance gains that could be within reach if they only included one of the database team?

Grant Fritchey shared his own cautionary tale over on Simple Talk, and it got us thinking: how many of our Redgate community have been in that situation, trying to build a value case for why the DBAs should be part of the project team, but short on real-life evidence to show the risks they could mitigate or disaster they could circumvent?

With your help, we want to create a library of user stories, that the SQL community can draw upon when they need to argue for a seat at the DevOps table. Like Grant’s example, you don’t have to name yourself or the company it happened to – we’re not interested in naming and shaming anyone. What we do want to do, is collate the best anecdotes and share them as a bank of lessons learnt, back to our Redgate community.

So you never again have to feel like you don’t have the evidence to back up your hunch of why the database needs to be included.

What will you get in return? Well, there’s the satisfaction of knowing that you’ve shared your knowledge and experience with your grateful peers…but if you need another reason, we’re judging the best submissions and giving away an Amazon Echo Show to our favorite story, and a $150 Amazon voucher to four runners

Share your story here: https://www.red-gate.com/hub/entrypage/competition

Rate

4 (1)

You rated this post out of 5. Change rating

Share

Share

Rate

4 (1)

You rated this post out of 5. Change rating