This content has been marked as final. Show 173 replies
Sometimes the experience you have is not enough to get a better job or to move on, if you are competing with others DBAs with the same time of experience that you, I'm 100% sure that if they had any kind of certification, they will be 1 step ahead of you to get that position. The market prefers "Certified" professionals. I agree with everybody, the certification at OCA, OCP,OCE level is a joke, it's so easy to get it, but is a true. I saw so many excellent candidates lose excellent opportunities only because they don't have any certification.
What I think, if you are a genuine DBA then you should not be bothering much >> about expensive courses & certifications, your hands on experience &
knowledge will take you to the heaven you deserve though you will not be titled >> like OCM, OCP etc by Oracle.
Francisco Munoz Alvarez
Better still, how about some verifiable credentials?
I'll have to start claiming the equivalent of about 75 years experience with Oracle.
As far as you go, who knows? You seem embarassed about your training and experience, why else would you hide it?
Thanks for reminding us that time spent and experience gained aren't necessarily the same thing.
" I saw so many excellent candidates lose excellent opportunities only because they don't have any certification."
You can flip that statement around and say employers lost out on excellent candidates because they've limited their selection via certification pre-requisites. Experienced DBAs on an interview panel would not limit themselves by a certification selection, mainly because there are better ways to find out if someone is good or not in an interview, asking technical questions or scenario questions for example. If you have a certification you need to be able to back it up. They're selling degrees over email now - there are ways to weed these people out and they're not to be taken for granted...
I agree with you. But many clients (not consulting companies) do not have so much knowledge at oracle side and do this kind of mistakes. Very often I'll say because I know many clients that have their own DBA (called by them Oracle Experts with OCA and OCP), and in the end they are really a DBO.
If you have a certification and a good experience, you will have a great advantage against the competition (only good experience, or only a certification).
In other fields, Microsoft or Cisco for example, I think it is mandatory in nearly all cases that if they are going for an advanced position that they have certifications, however, there certifications may have more stringent standards? I can see why some management, HR or recruiters may ask for these. Still, I'd be asking the person being interviewed to back up their credentials by answering questions correctly, hard for management sometimes.
"The use of multiple block sizes in a singledatabase instance is not encouraged because of
Yeah, that's why I backed-off on my advice, I forget
that not all of my readers are not experienced
Me, I want to manage every aspect of my ionstaces at
the most granular level possible, and I automate the
management overhead, but n00bs may not have those
skills . . . .
OK, so are you suggesting to those DBAs who are experienced, such as yourself, that:
"One of the very first things the Oracle 9i database administrator should do is to migrate all of their Oracle indexes into a large blocksize tablespace. Indexes will always favor the largest supported blocksize" ?
Really ??? You really believe that's one of the first things experienced DBAs should do, that indexes always favour the largest possible blocksize ???
But doesn't that directly contradict your later advice that:
"For most databases, creating multiple blocksizes is not going to make a measurable difference, and the deployment of multiple blocksizes must be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis."
What the ...
Don, you can't have it both ways, your advice contradicts itself and simply makes no sense.
Also, you seem to be having a hard time justifying your claim on multiblock sized indexes that:
"The benefits are well-documented, even in the Oracle docs".
Still no reference or link to back up this claim, I guess you're still searching ...
Hint for you Don, don't bother. Not only is it not "well documented", it's actually not documented within the Oracle docs at all !!
So how can you make such a claim ???
Hope this helps. . .LOL !! Not really ...
Richard, you are the most disagreeable and argumentative fellow I've ever met in DBA work. . . . If I said "black is black", you would no doubt argue that "black is white".
It's not funny anymore, hijacking threads like this one, just to toss-out insults while providing nothing to the OP. Grow-up, and respect the OP.
Yes, and while I removed it (so as not to get n00bs in over their heads), the first statement remains as great advice for senior DBA's, my primary audience.
your advice contradicts itself and simply makes no sense.
Yup, the docs suck. What else is new?
Not only is it not "well documented", it's actually not documented within the Oracle docs at all !!
Real-world experience, and lots of sound empirical evidence from my clients.
how can you make such a claim ???
It's always worked for my clients, (some with huge decreases in overhead), and I know many DBA's to like to segregate their data buffers for more control over I/O.
Oh, and don't bother chastising me for not revealing proof from my clients confidential data, nobody buys that nonsense:
Actually a lot of us do buy Richard's argument. There is a reason why the single most respected group of Oracle database technologists are the members of the Oak Table network. Oakies run real-world tests and validate their assumptions.
Of course you can not publish customer metrics. But unless you don't own enough computing power to build realistic environments ... there is nothing stopping you from publishing your own.
If I said "black is black", you would no doubt argueHi Don
that "black is white".
Unfortunately, you seem to claim "black is white" a lot :)
Yes, and while I removed it (so as not to get n00bsOK, so you're saying that the first thing an "experienced" DBA should do is migrate all the indexes into a large block size because for most databases, it's not going to make a measurable difference and must be evaluated carefully on a case by case basis !!
in over their heads), the first statement remains as
great advice for senior DBA's, my primary audience.
Black doesn't get any whiter than that !!
OK, so when you say the benefits are well documented, even in the Oracle Docs, you're actually referring to the Oracle docs that suck because they don't actually document what they're supposed to well document !!
actually not documented within the Oracle docs at all
Not only is it not "well documented", it's
Yup, the docs suck. What else is new?
Real-world experience, and lots of sound empirical
how can you make such a claim ???
evidence from my clients.
Wow, black really is white ...
It's always worked for my clients, (some with hugeWait a minute. How can it always work for your clients when you also say for most databases, creating multiple blocksizes isn't going to make a measurable difference !!
decreases in overhead), and I know many DBA's to like
to segregate their data buffers for more control over
Black is getting whiter by the minute :)
Oh, and don't bother chastising me for not revealingDon, you proof, never ;)
proof from my clients confidential data, nobody buys