Dec 13: Despicable
Here's a top tip for anyone who I might interview for a DBA job in future, based on three consecutive interviews for my replacement I just overheard.
If you really don't know the name of the package you use to collect object statistics for the cost based optimiser in 9i, you're really *not* a DBA and perhaps should pursue another career when the opportunity arises. You are, in particular, *not* a highly-paid contract DBA, no matter who else you might have managed to convince of that in the past.
That was only one of the questions. It's too painful to go into some of the others 
#2 - Robert V said:
2006-12-13 16:08 - (Reply)
I'm not a DBA (I'm an app specialist), but isn't that just DBMS_STATS?
If so, that should be common knowledge for all Oracle professionals. I mean, if you want to write good queries, you need to know how Oracle selects its method to access the data you're requesting. And that means having at least a basic understanding of how and where the statistics it uses are gathered.
But if you're talking about something else, please excuse me. 
#3.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-13 19:22 - (Reply)
(I think that trumps the DBMS_STATS issue!).
I suppose it does, but you'd think a dba with many years experience might have bumped into DBMS_STATS at some point!
And his backup and recovery strategy was weekly exports.
What's the matter with them, then? 
And he hadn't heard of the "consistent" export option.
I suppose they were connecting as SYSDBA, too.
Really, I'm amazed how few correct answers people are giving to basic questions. Then they start to say, well in OEM, you just click .... and then I click - off to sleep
#5 - Kevin Closson said:
2006-12-13 19:56 - (Reply)
Maybe we should ask candidates if they know the package to run after a patch or upgrade to see how many queries no longer have useful plans
#5.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-13 23:33 - (Reply)
Careful there! I still need to find work
#5.2.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-14 20:51 - (Reply)
Chris,
In the very short time I've known Kevin I've found he has a very keen sense of humour
#6.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-13 23:34 - (Reply)
And careful there, too! My cv is far too long, but at least it's occasionally honest
#7.1 - David Aldridge said:
2006-12-13 22:48 - (Reply)
"... whether we know all their is to know ... And don't even get me on to the subject of written communication skills."
Gotcha! 
#8 - Kevin Closson said:
2006-12-13 23:43 - (Reply)
I should think that a homonyn foible is not the sort problem these people have with written communication... hell, you want to see typos--read my blog
ugh
#9.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-14 09:55 - (Reply)
Doug, you may be making a mistake of context.
I disagree, but there *is* a distinct lack of context in the original blog. First, that's only one question out of a whole series. I'm not going to get into repeating all of them but the first question, with the highest marks and the most attention paid to it is 'What steps would you take to make sure a database is ready for production'. Most of the questions are of the 'what approach would you take to this problem' variety and they get those wrong too
However, my argument was that this is a simple general fact that every DBA should know, particularly one who is, by nature of the rate they're asking, declaring some sort of expertise.
I mean, you sound to me like you are equiponderating someone who doesn't know the package name and should, with someone who has actually gotten everything working smoothly and may simply not have used that package in months. You all may be incorrectly ruling out the experienced. Isn't that a bad interviewing technique?
I don't think so. Please re-read the question. We didn't ask 'What would the statement be to generate global partitioned statistics on tables and indexes with histograms on indexed columns' and expect them to write the correct syntax down. Several of the guys in the office agree with your general argument, by the way, but I disagree with both you and them.
Are you seriously saying that a DBA has used the DBMS_STATS package so infrequently that they can't remember the package name? Are DBAs reading any manuals, because it would pretty hard to avoid that knowledge? Do you think maybe this is why I keep coming across tables and indexes that have been created and statistics never generated? Wouldn't you be using DBMS_STATS after most table creates, data loads etc? So DBAs don't perform those activities regularly enough to remember the damn package name? I just don't buy it, I'm afraid. It's such basic knowledge.
I think all interviewing techniques miss out on the habits and analysis necessary for a good dba. Spewing memorized factoids - what good is that?
Well, I can at least agree with that 100% and have said so in the past, in this blog
http://oracledoug.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/872-Now-Thats-What-I-Call-An-Interview!.html
However, I was lifting one question out of an interview to represent a woeful lack of knowledge. I sincerely hope your argument is mainly against quizzes and not that a DBA could not know about DBMS_STATS. If they don't, our developers are going to laugh their socks off at the support they're being given.
#11.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-14 10:07 - (Reply)
You know what I think part of the problem is here? So much is learnt on the job these days and anyone who's fairly intelligent can find out how to do most things via Google. So as each new task comes up and they don't know about it they go research it then carry it out. On the job learning, I think it's called and I've done my fair share of it in the past.
Admirable as that is, wouldn't it be better if people didn't flounder around, working within their very small domain and perhaps sat down and read some books or (perish the thought) go and be trained properly? How on earth do you know what you don't know until it causes a problem unless someone's taken an interest in making sure you do know the things you need to know?
(I also think this is why the standard of permanent staff seems so high these days - training and a lack of self-satisfaction - and the standard of contractors is plummetting - you can work out the opposite)
I wouldn't mind so much if people exhibited a bit more embarassment about their lack of knowledge - mine embarasses me all the time - but they seem to think that these standards are acceptable.
I don't know, maybe I'm just missing something here
#11.1.1 - CarlosAL said:
2006-12-15 09:00 - (Reply)
Doug:
>>"You know what I think part of the problem is here? So much is learnt on the job these days and anyone who's fairly intelligent can find out how to do most things via Google.
...
Admirable as that is, wouldn't it be better if people didn't flounder around, working within their very small domain and perhaps sat down and read some books or (perish the thought) go and be trained properly?"
I couldn't agree more. I even wrote about it here (in spanish):
http://carlosal.wordpress.com/2006/05/24/pereza-programacion-e-internet/
Everytime I talk this way with my colleagues, they call me 'old fart'
Maybe they are right.
>>"On the job learning, I think it's called and I've done my fair share of it in the past."
I do it all the time... visiting sites like yours!
Cheers.
Carlos.
#12 - Bob Mycroft 2006-12-14 16:56 - (Reply)
I dont understand how people *cant* get excited about new features and want to go and try stuff and read the books and heaven help us "just have a play" when they work in this industry. Every year I realise how much I dont know and the scarey thing is there is stuff out there that I-dont-know-I-dont-know! It always depresses the crap out of me every time I have to go and tell a developer about the special hell I have prepared for him (it probably involves spikey chairs and little red men with pitchforks and horns, but hey - im traditional like that) if he puts another RULE hint into my 10g system, after being asked twice not to.
The bottom line is this for me; Someone who doesnt know something but *wants* to know and puts the effort in is fine. Better than fine - they are great. Its the people who just dont care that worry me and are not really interested in DBA'ing or developing but come to work for the 9-5. ESPECIALLY when im on callout......
Ok, rant over, I feel better now.
-Bob
#14 - joel garry said:
2006-12-15 00:12 - (Reply)
Are you seriously saying that a DBA has used the DBMS_STATS package so infrequently that they can't remember the package name?
At the risk of a great deal of embarassment, I am. I'm working on a project where I'm doing lots of data loads. But I do it all in scripts, and I just grab the script from several years back that has the package call in it, and paste it in to the script at the appropriate place, look at it to be sure it is sane, and move on. Amid the vast number of other things I do the name of the package doesn't have to stick (I just think of it as "that package that superceded analyse... or was it analyze? Or is it supersede?) This doesn't mean I don't know what it is or does(I do), and it doesn't mean I haven't put a great deal of research in the past into those two ways of generating stats (I have) - it just means I'm terrible at remembering exact names of things unless I'm typing them in manually every day - and I'm against such manual labor, I believe only through scripts can you make a replicable procedure. In other words, I'm only expert at the last thing I've done - I'm a geek, and I get deep into things. To say that means I couldn't quickly become expert at some thing I've done in the past would be wrong. To say I'm too much of a space case to deal with environments that expect instant answers for every conceivable dba subject that comes along, well, that might be right. It might also indicate there is something wrong with such an environs. And there lies the basic problem with interviews - how well do they model the environs?
Now, I have no doubt I could ask someone a series of questions off the top of my head and establish where they are in the pantheon of dba, and I'm sure many could do the same (perhaps including anyone you would be overhearing and not laughing at). We must remember that there will be people reading this who will take it as OK to rate people based on a list of interview questions.
Of course, I have to say, I've seen plenty of ungood expensive dba's. I clean up after them!
wouldn't it be better if people didn't flounder around, working within their very small domain and perhaps sat down and read some books or (perish the thought) go and be trained properly?
Welllllll, yeah, but it presupposes a lot. For example, I took MTS training a decade ago... and I've done nothing since except throw it out because it inappropriate for the environments I use. How are we to know what is a waste of time? How are we independent contractors to pay for it? How can we get out of our own small domain, when people only pay for what we already can do?
Personally, I'd rather have a regular dba job where I do work and they send me to training and give me health benefits and so on... but companies would rather pay me more to work on specific things... who am I to argue with economics? It's the only way I can afford to live in a really nice place. If I call myself a "database consultant" instead of a "dba" does anyone care? Only HR droids, so far as I can determine.
#14.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-15 10:14 - (Reply)
it just means I'm terrible at remembering exact names of things unless I'm typing them in manually every day - and I'm against such manual labor, I believe only through scripts can you make a replicable procedure
True but a) someone has to write the script, we can't all just depend on scripts being around and b) what happens when you create a new object as a one-off? (i.e. have to step out of the domain you know intimately) Do you look for a script or do you generate stats on it there and then?
I actually work beside someone who has terrible difficult remember the names of things. However, I repeat that we do actually ask a ton of more long-winded questions that are looking for creative thinking and experience.
That's the thing to remember here. Personally, I still find it worrying that someone wouldn't know that the package is DBMS_STATS (that's why I pulled that small example out) but, even if remembering package names isn't someone's speciality, they have more than enough opportunity to shine on the more narrative answers.
It's also important to know the package name because I see DBAs (particularly on this development team) as the source of technical knowledge for the developers.
In other words, I'm only expert at the last thing I've done - I'm a geek, and I get deep into things.
In that case, it's probably about what we're looking for from a DBA to fit in to a team that supports many different developments. In fact, we're quite like this ...
(Without the "instant" or "every conceivable", which would be exaggerations)
environments that expect instant answers for every conceivable dba subject that comes along, well, that might be right. It might also indicate there is something wrong with such an environs.
I can't think what's wrong with the environment if you have the people who can deliver. Isn't the ability to suggest many alternatives (rather than a few you know about because you've been working on them recently) likely to improve the chance that you come up with the best fit for the problem?
And there lies the basic problem with interviews - how well do they model the environs?
In this case, I think the interview models the environment really well and a group of us spent a lot of time coming up with the questions. That means that some people might not suit our environment, but suit others very well, but having worked at a lot of different sites, I would describe this one as pretty standard DBA fare.
We must remember that there will be people reading this who will take it as OK to rate people based on a list of interview questions.
But you have to have *some* way of measuring people's technical ability. Otherwise you just end up with a bunch of guys you like. I've been burnt far too often by that in the past ... (I emphasise that they do not need to be quiz-type questions and very few of ours are)
Personality and attitude are *very* important but if someone doesn't know how to do something, that can cause lots of problems no matter how well-intentioned they are. Remember, we're talking about a senior contract role here - they shouldn't have to do *too* much learning on our time
How are we to know what is a waste of time?
I agree that some training won't be helpful and people can always give me examples where it didn't work, but I could also give you lots of examples where it has.
How are we independent contractors to pay for it? How can we get out of our own small domain, when people only pay for what we already can do?
Erm, out of our high daily rates? If we really think we're independent techies who are running a business, shouldn't we consider investing in our skills?
As for your last paragraph, I think it's true that this whole area is a bit of a mess, not helped by companies having very limited expectations of their contractors, but that's why I'm going to keep moaning about it, because it's not good enough. I don't expect it will have any effect whatsoever, though
#15 - Dave Whiting 2006-12-15 12:03 - (Reply)
It's not just the skill level of Oracle DBA's that's an issue. I was on a training course this week and was talking to the guy who works for a big UK bank. He does the technical interviews for Unix Admins and he told me how utterly frustrated he is with the poor skill levels of the people he sees. One of the big issues is that candidates CV's do not match their real experience. He's lost count the number of times the reply to a question is that they simply run a script without a real understanding of what they're doing. The coincidental thing was I was waiting for an interview for a contract Unix role for the same bank! They'd suspended the interviews for the time being because of the frustration at not being able to judge from the CV's who was worth seeing. We sorted it out there and then
While I'm at it, there's another issue that is common across the whole IT industry. How can contractors skill levels continue to be of high value to companies unless they take responsibility for what they're supposed to be offering? The industry is constantly moving with new technology being introduced at a fairly rapid rate. Most of the new knowledge I need to develop I can get by reading stuff. However, there are some new technologies that I can not fully grasp from a book, so I have to attend formal training. This is not a cheap option but I factor this into my rate that I charge clients. There's probably a tiny percentage of contractors who would do this. I was told by my banking friend that two thirds of their Unix Admins are contractors. I was appalled to hear that the contract staff have made noises to the effect that if the company want them to do certain projects, they will have to pay for their training. What?!
On a different subject, the course I was attending was IBM's Advanced Virtualisation for Pseries. This is an interesting topic because it allows you to increase the utilisation of a box by virtualising the CPU and hardware. The good news is that it does what it's supposed to do. The issue is that it adds another level of complexity to the architecture. This is good, the customer gets more flexibility and can better utilise their investment. This what IBM's marketing department tell you and it's true. They also tell customers that this new technology will require less manpower to support it. The truth is that it will require the same manpower as before because you still have the same number of OS's to build/support. The real issue is that the more technologies they introduce, the higher level of skill required work with it. The end customers are not really aware of this. They hear stuff like 'self managing' and buy into it.
Oh, and good luck trying to look at performance when you've got stuff like dynamic load balancing across shared CPU's under the cover
#16.1 - Pete_s said:
2006-12-16 09:43 - (Reply)
...Isn't it Oracle that is working towards the DBA-less database?...
And Microsoft working towards having DBAs?
#17.1.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-16 11:15 - (Reply)
#18 - joel garry said:
2006-12-18 02:14 - (Reply)
I can't think what's wrong with the environment if you have the people who can deliver. Isn't the ability to suggest many alternatives (rather than a few you know about because you've been working on them recently) likely to improve the chance that you come up with the best fit for the problem?
Well of course, I'm thinking of a particular environment that probably is the evil-star-trek-universe converse of yours. They basically give the titles to people that have no training at all (and are supposed to learn it), and depend on contractors to do the actual work and "mentor" the employees. In many cases, these employees have, um, attitude problems. The part about expecting instant answers on every conceivable subject is not an exageration, and I was always amazed that there were some people (who invariably came out of Oracle corp consulting) who could pull it off.
I can't think what's wrong with the environment if you have the people who can deliver. Isn't the ability to suggest many alternatives (rather than a few you know about because you've been working on them recently) likely to improve the chance that you come up with the best fit for the problem?
Those same people would be very frustrated at times as they would give several alternatives, and the customer would ignore all to follow some marketing or management fad BS.
And the worse-than-useless dba's? They'd somehow always wind up in the Data Modeling group... there were a few who actually did put some effort into it and became decent dba's. But the mode was bad.
I was appalled to hear that the contract staff have made noises to the effect that if the company want them to do certain projects, they will have to pay for their training.
Many US companies simply abuse contractors as cheap/expendable employees, and for those, at least, it's not such an unreasonable demand. I've done it, in fact, although my usual attitude is to bend over to please the customer. Backwards, even
#19.1 - Tedc said:
2006-12-20 15:17 - (Reply)
What about "one-women" companies. Don't you have those in the UK
#19.1.1 - Doug Burns said:
2006-12-20 15:54 - (Reply)
Yeah, plenty of them! Perhaps I should have said one-person companies to be clear, but you'll have detected the slightly less than positive tone of that comment, so it was a dig at men, if anything
#23.1.1.1 - Doug Burns said:
2007-01-03 15:07 - (Reply)
See you in Dallas.
Cool!
I prefer the more problem-solving questions too
I'd planned a little blogging this weekend but my niece gave birth at 4:43 am today and it looks like I'll spend tomorrow driving to Aberdeen to visit her. It's only about 100 miles each way, but they're among the worst 100 miles I've ever driven (Anyone
Tracked: Dec 16, 22:17
Well, I'm not sure that life begins at 40, but my 41st year has certainly seen plenty of action and some pleasant (and not) surprises. Forgive me such a long blog, but I started jotting down a few notes and things got a little out of hand. The drink isn
Tracked: Dec 31, 21:33
Regular readers won't need to stretch their imagination too far to know that I agree with Howard.I feel his frustration, particularly because when you're an instructor, you pass on what you hope is high quality information that form the basic building blo
Tracked: Jan 16, 12:50