I really believe that much of this lack in knowledge comes from the advent of MS SQL server.  I am not putting down MS SQL; I have been working with it since the original version .  But before MS SQL Server the only other database engine that I can think of, that didn’t require command line administration was Sybase.  Before MS SQL you actually had to know what you were doing when you worked on main frame databases.  And yes, SQL databases existed on main frames well before MS SQL server.  Originally I worked on main frame SQL Databases, SQL/DS and Ingress writing FORTRAN with embedded SQL.  There were no wizards or tools, not even a GUI to help you create a database and its’ objects.  Every thing was command line and you had to understand what you were doing.  The database engines were not forgiving so you had to understand how to tune to get the best performance.  I was lucky enough to work for a manager who fully understood database architecture and fundamentals and who insisted that his employees get the proper training.

With the advent of MS SQL server, companies who before could not afford a database now had the opportunity of running database applications.  That along with the internet boom caused a high demand for all types of IT people making it easier for those with less than adequate skills and even non-technical individuals to obtain work in the industry.  This also pertains to management.  Many managers can not determine whether their systems are being efficiently and properly administered so these DBAs with less than adequate skills continue to hold down positions and are not required to get proper training and skills.  Many of these database people have never worked with any one who does have good experience from which they can learn.  I can’t count the times I have seen the word “sequel” written by a manager or even a CIO when referring to SQL. And by the way, how many people know that it stands for Structured Query Language?  

In the past 7 years I have worked with so many so-called DBAs who have no experience prior to MS SQL 7.0 and when you ask them to set up maintenance they use the Wizard and couldn’t begin to write a script to do maintenance.  Microsoft it’s self, with the roll out of MS SQL 7.0, marketed and totted that MS SQL server was basically a self contained database that needed minimal administration.  So why would you need to hire technically experienced individuals to be a DBA.  An individual could much more easily take a course to teach them how to take the MS certification tests and get a job.  But passing the test and getting a certification does not always mean they have obtained the knowledge.

I would never claim to be a SQL Guru however I have passed many 2 to 3 hour technical interviews and the positions I have held are indications that I can answer the basics and many of the more complex SQL characteristics.  In the first two companies where I worked as a Database developer/DBA I had the good fortune of working with highly competent and knowledgeable individuals.  My first couple of years I had some great mentors and as I became more experienced I still had highly skilled individuals to bounce things off of.  That is why I could not believe 7 years later, when I moved to a new area and started contracting for a different company, the abundances of DBA’s/Database developers who do not know such basics as those questions.  I started asking my self why there were so many people that had such little SQL knowledge and I started seeing the pattern, as I mentioned above, that 90% of these individual’s only database experience was with MS SQL and had never had to really understand a database engine.  Many of these individuals were hired during a time when the demand was high and supply was low.

The pendulum has gone from a point, where 20 years ago you needed mathematics or an engineering degree to be in the computer industry to the other extreme where 16 years old that have played around with coding can get a job.  Like most things the pendulum with time usually balances out.