|
| Featured Contents |
| Question of the Day |
|
| The Voice of the DBA |
The DBA is Dead; Long Live the DBA I remember getting a job at a startup in the Denver Tech Center. This was shortly after SQL Server 7 was released, with a marketing campaign that the platform was auto-tuning and wouldn't require a DBA. My colleague asked me if I wanted to learn Cold Fusion and have a longer career. I declined and stuck with this SQL Server thing, which has seemed to work out pretty well over the years. I was reminded of this when I saw a "Death of the DBA Again" post, this time from an Oracle DBA. There are plenty of links in there from Larry Ellison and Oracle about how some version of Oracle won't require a DBA. I've seen questions on Reddit (and elsewhere ) about this topic where people seem to think DBAs can be replaced. Or maybe they want them replaced. There are no shortage of posts on why this isn't the case (Grant, Kellyn, Brent, William, Boris). These all look slightly different, but the main thrust is that there is still data management-type work and people are needed to do it. Or maybe to direct the AIs to do it. An interesting post from Kendra last year that we will see less DBA jobs because good DBAs can leverage AI to replace a few less-good DBAs. I like her approach, and the key reason why AI agent usage will grow is that they can potentially just make less mistakes than a human. If that human is you, then you might not have a job. I do think that the DBA as a gatekeeper or a single point of managing systems and ensuring backups/security/patches are made is dwindling. However, there are still lots of places for database-related work. High Availability setups are needed; someone has to work with InfoSec and auditors and implement their requirements. That might be especially important as those requirements might not be clear and clean enough for all your systems. While ETL might be a thing of the past with the various "links", without a doubt, people will link too many tables to analytics systems, leading to overloaded systems, too many resources being used, and costs being too high. That might be a reason we will still need some type of DBA. They need to field the complaints from budget holders and work on a resolution to reduce costs. The DBA will continue to exist in many organizations, but the job will change, and you need to evolve. There might be other organizations that don't want a "DBA" as a title, but they will need a data engineer, a full-stack developer spending more of their time on the database stack, an InfoSec person that mostly works on database security, or some other job that absorbs all the data-related chores. There is a lot of opportunity still out there, but the bar is being raised, and one end of that bar rests on AI. Improve your skills, show your value, and become someone who delivers results and doesn't just say "No." Steve Jones - SSC Editor Join the debate, and respond to today's editorial on the forums |
|
| Featured Contents |
