Gary Varga (6/19/2013)
kevaburg (6/19/2013)
What bothers me is the need to have a product that the accidental and/or average DBA can use. DB Servers are maintained by people that have been trained and understand the inner workings of what they are using. It isn't like being a road sweeper: Simply pick up a brush and sweep.Without the in-depth knowledge of memory architecture, index management, backup and recovery strategies along with at least basic knowledge of database design how could they hope to perform the job they need to on mission-critical information management systems. And lets face it: Databases represent for most companies a mission-critical investment that helps keep them mobile in a dynamic market.
This is one of the problems Microsoft has had with Windows (but only one :)). Because via the GUI everything is relatively easy to do, everyone that tampered with a Windows Server called themselves Administrators. They didn't think about the security implications associated with these machines. As long as people could access resources it must be working, right?
Do we really want that sort of attitude with our database servers simply because someone wants something to be made simpler or more intuitive? I find the SSMS intuitive enough. I understand the wording used, I know where to find the information that will help me in my work and I can intelligently argue one opinion against another so that the best solution can be found to a given problem.
I think the best thing that can happen is that these accidental and/or average DBAs realise their need to learn and that bosses realise the need for them to learn.
Valid but unrealistic in my opinion.
Software should be as easy to use as possible but unfortunately a side effect is that people without proper training and experience get the responsibility thrust upon them. Or maybe the side effect is that the software is produce to help those who have this responsibility.
As for mission critical, not all so called accidental DBAs are dealing with mission critical databases. Useful: yes. Important: definitely. Essential: maybe.
But we aren't talking about software as such. We are talking about an evolving entity which is what a database is. If I get punched in the stomach I gasp for breath which is exactly what you are doing when you misassign instance memory or don't have a backup when a backup is really needed.
"Valid but unrealistic" is how you put it. Is it unrealistic to pick up a book and read it or for an employer to get a course sorted? I don't think so.
But as long as there are people out there that market themselves as administrators when they clearly aren't (and you only have to look at some of the questions here to identify them) the consultants that get paid a huge amount of money to correct their mistakes will always have a job! So, realistically, where is the benefit to a company that ignore the lack of his adminisrtators knowledge.
To an extent, I agree with you and some of your conclusions. What I can't agree with is the apathy that far too many people have towards a subject that affects (in many instances) how a company reacts in a constantly changing market.