April 16, 2008
It's not all that often I get to shamelessly piggyback off of the work of someone else and boost my page hits at the same time so I ride it when I can. But this story from today's Simple-Talk newsletter was not only interesting, I find that I really don't have much to add to it.
I just wanted everyone to take notice.
Posted by Sean McCown on April 16, 2008 11:01 AM
November 30, 2007
OK, somebody's going to have to help me here. Apparently I don't even know what a crime is anymore.
I just read an article on a SQL Server Magazine blog about this whole Idera lawsuit business. You can read it here. In there is an inberview with Rick Pleczko where he said: "This is a civil case, not a criminal case, and neither Quest [nor anyone else] has accused us of criminal behavior. Any information to the contrary is completely false."
OK, I get that... you need to defend yourself, but come on. At the top of that very same blog you'll notice that it says there are allegations of Idera violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Ummm... I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty criminal to me. How do they figure that it isn't? If you look up the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act on Wikipedia it shows you the prison time associated with violations of this act. Funny, I didn't know they handed out prison sentences for civil matters.
Now, just because nobody's filed criminal charges doesn't mean that what they're being accused of isn't criminal. Look up the act online anywhere and I don't think you'll find any sites that call it a civil affair. It's what the government uses to put hackers in prison.
So nice try, but I'm not biting. Again, just because the charges haven't been filed doesn't mean it's not criminal.
Posted by Sean McCown on November 30, 2007 04:45 PM
November 27, 2007
WOW, this is big. I just found an article about a lawsuit filed by Quest Software against Idera where they allege patent infringement as well as criminal hacking and property theft. The article is on Technology Law 360.
Man, this is just big.
Ok, according to the story, Quest is saying that Idera has not only been copying their software to the point that they're infringing their patents, but they've actually illegally hacked into Quest's computers and stole secret product information.
This isn't me talking, this is the article about the lawsuit.
Personally, I think Rick Pleczko had better be careful or he and many others at Idera could be facing jail time on this hacking business. That's a serious offense.
Anyway, if you want to see it for yourself, you can view the article here. You'll have to join, but the trial membership is free and you'll be able to see the article right away. It's pretty interesting.
I'll keep you posted as I find things out, but unless something major happens, this could be the end of Idera.
Happy reading!
Posted by Sean McCown on November 27, 2007 08:53 AM
June 22, 2007
Sometimes it can be really difficult to get changes made in your company. And most of the time the more important the change is, the harder it is to make it happen. However, there can be a way to get things done that lights a fire under their butts.
One technique I like to employ when the opportunity arises is to wait until something big happens and then ride the skirt of the aftermath to get my change made. Here's a recent example... I wanted to reduce the rights of this one generic accout in our DB so that we could put the DB in dbo only mode during our maintenance. The problem was that we can't get our maintenance done because processes keep logging on to do run reports. They were ruluctant, and it was a fight, but I finally got it done. Now, now even 2wks later, we had problems with our ETL and it was running several hours behind. We're actually doing our best to get it done, so we've got the DB in dbo only mode again... and guess what... that generic account won't be interfering with ETL because I took those rights away. Currently, everyone is thrilled that we don't have to worry about the extra usage on the box while we're trying to get ETL finished. So misison accomplished.
To that end, I've also wanted to limit the access of all the users. Everyone has way more access than they should, and I've been trying to find a way to bring that up for serious conversation. Well, since I was right about this one, then if I strike while the iron's hot, I should be able to get them to listen to me about the others too. I've got good solid logic behind me, so I'm not going in there unprepared. But timing is everything.
Another good technique is to use data collection. Whenever you have a production issue, you have to determine the root cause. Well, record that info with dates, and details. Now, whenever you're ready to go to management with your change, you have actual numbers to back you up. I've documented that 45% of our production issues come from people making unauthorized changes in our DB, so if those rights go, we should see a dramatic decrease in production issues. You can't argue with numbers. Don't get me wrong... I know they still do, and those are the battles you just can't win. Sometimes all you can do is all you can do... but at least you'll have more ammo than you would otherwise.
So collect your info, and hang off the skirts of disasters and you'll have a lot more success.
Posted by Sean McCown on June 22, 2007 07:35 AM
June 19, 2007
OK, I've been promising this for a long time now, but I finally got the RSS ready for IT Bookworm. So you guys go on and subscribe and I'll update it with book and video reviews as well as press releases for new books and videos. I may even put some training discounts up there if they come my way.
Posted by Sean McCown on June 19, 2007 07:26 PM
June 14, 2007
For a long time now I've been hearing that Quest was going to release a LiteSpeed for Oracle. Actually, to tell the whole truth, I've been hearing it since the Imceda days for those of you who can remember back that far. After the Oracle release, they were then to release DB2, MySQL, Sybase, etc. LiteSpeed was going to take over the entire backup market.
Now I hear that LiteSpeed for Oracle has been cancelled. There are lots of rumors going around as to why, and when you get down to it, it really doesn't matter. I happen to know that a lot of their customers have been waiting for this for a long time. The pitch for almost 3yrs now has been that LiteSpeed was a full enterprise database backup solution because it was going to bring your entire enterprise together under one database backup umbrella. I've even preached that many times myself because I was being told from very high up that it was going to happen. It was actually exciting. Just think about it. No matter what your platform, you can manage all of your database backups from one single repository. You could get all of your reports in a single place, manage all your licenses in a single place, and even push out all your installs from a single place. But that's not going to happen now.
It's not like the product doesn't exist. I've actually played with an early beta of LiteSpeed for Oracle. So it's not like they couldn't figure out how to do it.
One of the more substantial rumors I've heard is that Oracle is in the process of developing the same technology and Quest didn't feel like competing with them. Hey, you know what... whatever. Even if Oracle did develop backup compression technology they still wouldn't offer you the same thing LiteSpeed would have, and that's unified backup management for all your platforms.
Frankly, I've seen Quest pump out some real crap and push it on us like we're stupid. TOAD for SQL Server comes to mind. There's also their Change Director for SQL Server... don't even get me started on that one. Maybe I'll talk about that one soon. And then the really good ideas like LiteSpeed for Oracle and Coefficient get tabled. Now, Coefficient is still out there, and you can still buy it, but to my knowledge it hasn't gone through any significant revision since Quest bought Imceda.
So if any of their sales people contact you and give you the song and dance about LiteSpeed unifying your different DB backup platforms, tell them I said they're full of it.
Basically we're right back where we started though... without a way to take care of all of our DB platforms in one place. And what are we going to do, turn to Backup Exec or ArcServe? I DON'T THINK SO. I'd rather manage my backups by hand than get involved with either of those products.
Anyway, if you look at LiteSpeed for SQL Server sales as any kind of an estimate on what your LiteSpeed for Oracle sales would be, then Quest is making a BIG mistake. Imceda was the only player in the market for SQL Server backup compression and they mopped up. Even after Idera and Red-Gate came along, LiteSpeed still sold (and is still selling) like hotcakes. It just goes to show that there's enough market to go around for everyone. But Quest wouldn't have to share it with everyone. They'd have the entire market all to themselves. And even if Oracle did get in the game, Oracle has this way of making everything more difficult than it needs to be, so there'd still be a benefit to LiteSpeed. And again, there's still that whole unified management thing it would bring you.
This is just a really good example of Quest not listening to their customers because I know for a fact that many of their customers have been begging for this. And how many people do you know who would tell you that they don't want 85% compression on their backups and drastically reduced backup times? Nobody that I've ever seen.
So again, what is Quest doing?
Posted by Sean McCown on June 14, 2007 05:36 PM
March 12, 2007
At PASS last fall I had the opportunity to meet one of the Apress editors, James Huddleston. I spent quite a bit of time talking to him about a number of topics and we even kicked around some book ideas. I was really looking forward to working with him in the future because he was just such an interesting guy.
I found out last week that he pass away suddenly, and I'd like to extend my sincerest condolences to his family.
Here's the release I got from Apress:
It’s with great sadness that Apress learned one of their own, editor James Huddleston, passed away unexpectedly on Sunday, February 25, leaving his partner Judith, and a young family. He will be missed. He took pride in his work as an editor, but equally gratifying was his work as a classicist. His translations, from the original Greek, of Homer’s Odyssey and Hesiod’s Shield of Herakles can be found on The Chicago Homer: http://www.library.northwestern.edu/homer/.
You know, it's always saddened me that when someone dies, their live is summed up in just a couple sentences. Is it really possible to do that? Well, it's what we've got though, so I guess we have to live with it. The other thing that gets to me is just the injustice of it all. Here you've got a hard-working family man who actually contributed something to society, and he gets a couple lines. Then you've got Anna Nicole who got tons of press on everything from her hairdresser to the guy who designed her coffin lid. Whatever.
Take care James.
Posted by Sean McCown on March 12, 2007 11:08 AM
March 07, 2007
OK, I'll admit right up front that this blog isn't really about DBs at all. I just wanted to tell a quick story.
About 12yrs ago or so now, I was working in a call center. There were hundreds of us in the building spanning several floors, and prob a good couple hundred of us on a single floor. I got into a argument with a couple guys one day on the validity of learning keyboard shortcuts in lieu of the mouse. I felt that everyone should learn keyboard shortcuts, and they didn't see any reason why it would ever be necessary.
Well, a couple days later I went through the entire floor and stole all the mouse balls. Every single one. There wasn't a mouse ball anywhere on the entire floor.
The next day, I sat back and watched as an entire floor of tech support people were rendered completely helpless because they never bothered learning the simplest of keyboard shortcuts. The emails started rolling in... whoever took the mouse balls, it's very funny. Now bring them back....etc... they started out very nice and all, but then got very caustic. About 4hrs into the day they started distributing cheat sheets for keyboard shortcuts to everyone since nobody could really even open their email without their mouse. So things were a little slow for a day or so, but then people started getting the hang of it, and actually didn't mind so much. About a week or so later they were able to get the mice up and running again, but I noticed that some guys still used the keyboard a lot... including the 2 guys that started this whole thing. They found how much easier it was to keep your hands in one place.
Now, I didn't really start that whole thing with the intention of actually teaching anyone a lesson, but I think it worked out well enough. And I'm only bringing this up now because I found that sack of mouse balls in my garage a while back and it made me giggle for a few minutes.
Oddly enough though, I judge a lot of apps these days by how many keyboard shortcuts they put in. Do you want my hands to be productive, or moving back and forth all day?
Anyway, thought you guys might like that story.
And oddly enough, that's the first time I've ever told anyone that story.
Posted by Sean McCown on March 7, 2007 07:53 AM
November 21, 2006
Is There a Future for SQLServerCentral.com?
By now it's no secret that SQLServerCentral.com has been bought out by Red-Gate. In fact, I even blogged on it last week. I've had a chance to talk to Red-Gate about it, as well as a few dozen users and MVPs.
Red-Gate says they intend to keep it as a community site and grow it as much as they can. However, they also plan to use the membership list. I didn't ask for what purpose, because why would I? We all know they're talking about marketing. And I suppose that's their right because they bought the site, but I know they're going to lose a lot of users over it. People don't want to be cold called by anyone. Without exception, everyone I talked to said that they're worried about how things will change with a vendor in charge. Red-Gate hasn't yet said how they're going to run the site, and I'm sure those things are still being ironed out. I do think however that we're all being naive if we think they'll let someone go on and write a review against one of their products. Pretty much the same way you couldn't go onto my personal site and tell me how horrible my daughter is. I'd pull it down the second it got posted.
Anyway, I had about half a dozen guys ask if I was planning to step up and host the next big community site. Honestly, I just don't know. I think it may be a little too early to completely write-off SQLServerCentral.com just because it's a vendor site now. I think the future will show that it'll still be a valuable resource, but it'll go the way of the rest of the vendor sites where you'll take what you can from it, and then move on to another site for objective opinions. It does always leave you with that vague feeling of "what are they trying to sell me" in the back of your head though doesn't it?
Anyway, tomorrow I'll be griping about MS not caring about DBAs, so stay tuned.
Posted by Sean McCown on November 21, 2006 08:42 AM
October 10, 2006
Quest has released a freeware tool to compete with Red-Gate's change management suite. Quest's tool is actually 3 tools in 1. It has a schema compare tool, a data compare tool, and a server compare tool. Of course, it's just version 1 so it doesn't have the richness that the Red-Gate tools have. For example, Red-Gate has a scheduler and an API for their tools. That's a decent difference in functionality.
At this point though, I really don't think Quest is trying to take those more advanced clients away from Red-Gate. They're probably just trying to get them back for stealing a lot of their lower end LiteSpeed business. I'm not saying that's what they're doing, but that's what I would do if I had the money to blow on something like that. I also wouldn't be surprised if this were just the beginning. Now that Quest has a product in this space, all they have to do is keep developing it, and they could have a high-level product that will actually be able to take business away from Red-Gate.
Personally, I like the Red-Gate guys. I talk to them at all the conferences and they're always really cool. I also like their tools... including their backup tool. But I have to admit, if what I needed was a good compare tool, I would look to the freeware to take me as far as it could before having to pay for a license.
I've actually looked at the tool and it looks pretty good. It does a good job of doing the compares, and the interface is a lot like Red-Gate's so you won't be lost. It's fast enough too, so you shouldn't have any problems there. Anyway, just thought I'd let you guys know because I know how hard it can be for some companies to let go of even the smallest amount of money.
Here's the link:
http://www.quest.com/Comparison_Suite_for_SQL_Server/
Posted by Sean McCown on October 10, 2006 06:57 PM
October 09, 2006
Now THAT'S Training... Or IS It?
As many of you know, I do book reviews on many IT topics. Well, a lot of you may not know that I've started reviewing video titles as well. I've got some video titles that I've posted very recently, and I'd like to talk about them for a min. I've also got some book reviews that I've posted recently, and I'll tell you about those briefly too.
I've got 2 examples here of video training; one excellent, and one horrible. I'll briefly discuss both of them and you can go read the full reviews if you like.
AppDev:
I've gotten a hold of the training from AppDev and have finished like 3 of their titles. Their training is simply top notch. The production quality is very high, and the instruction is fantastic. You can really tell that these guys know their stuff. I've got the SQL Server 2005 training, and I'm starting to go through it now. I'll let you guys know when I've got it posted. Seriously though, if you ever get a chance to take any of their training, don't pass it up.
SQLUSA:
I've also been through the SQLUSA training. I honestly can't imagine a bigger waste of money. You'd really be better off learning SQL from a house painter. This guy spends so much time just surfing the web and rehashing things he's already said. His code doesn't even work often times and he has to take drastic measures to fix it. For example... He couldn't get his data to load one time and after trying a few things, ended up taking the PKs and FKS off the tables. Just ridiculous. Also, another time he was trying to show us the SQL services, and got lost in the OS. He tried a couple things before he found the services window. Dude, edit that crap out. And yet another time, his phone rang and he didn't edit that out either. Anyway, you can read much more detail in the review.
Know though, the one I reviewed is for OLAP, but they also have one for managine SQL2K5, which I went through a little bit, but didn't actually do a write-up on it yet. Trust me though, it's equally pathetic.
I'm also doing a series on certifications for SQL2K5. I've got some of the official materials now, and I'm collecting more so as they come in, I'll be reviewing them and putting them in a big cert bundle. Is anyone interested in that?
You can see all the reviews at www.ITBookworm.com and click on Videos on the left.
Posted by Sean McCown on October 9, 2006 04:28 PM
June 07, 2006
Idera has issued a press release outlining their new world record backup benchmark. As it stands, the benchmark results are reported in a misleading fashion, so let me go through some of this for you.
"Using 'off the shelf' technologies available today to any data center customer, the companies achieved backup speeds in excess of 4.5 terabytes per hour and restores speeds in excess of 2.3 terabytes per hour. These metrics reflect a more than 20% and 75% performance increase, respectively, over previously documented benchmarks for SQL Server backup and recovery."
OK, that's directly out of the press release and I think it outlines a couple really important parts. First, look at the backup speeds... 4.5 TB/hr. Man, that's fast. In fact, it's a lot faster than any backup benchmark out there, so they're right about that. However, what did they do to make it so fast? I mean after all, I've never known them to be that much faster than LiteSpeed or Red Gate. The secret is found where they say that the hardware is open to any data center. It didn't take me long to chase it down after I read it just a little more closely.
What's going on here is they're using Solid State Disks (SSD) on their system. For those of you who don't know what SSDs are, they're really super fast disks that are basically huge banks of RAM instead of platters. Their speed is measured in microseconds instead of milliseconds found in SCSI. The bottom line is that SSDs are exponentially faster than SCSI, but the cost also reflects that as well. In fact, they're really just way too expensive for most shops to even consider.
While Idera isn't really being deceitful (because they are disclosing the hardware details), they are being deliberately sneaky by not telling us that SSDs are what's being used. In fact, they're using a 16-way 64-bit box with SSDs. That's just an insane system and it better damn well be faster than anything else out there. And sure, SSDs are available to anyone who wants to buy them, but who's going to do that?
The reason I say they're being sneaky is because absolutely nobody out there is using SSDs in production, and they didn't take any other backups to use as a baseline. If it were a responsible benchmark it would have listed the SQL Server native backup times and then the Idera backup times. Of course they beat everyone else's benchmarks, they're running on hardware like a gazillion times faster, but how does it do against the other vendors on the same hardware? Will it still show such incredible results? My guess is NO. Hell, you could probably put a single-threaded QBasic application on that system and still record a world record benchmark.
Doing the benchmark this way is the same as a car company saying that their car is the fastest on the road by going from 0 to 120 in 5secs. Of course, they used nitrous oxide, and special tires, but that part is completely irrelevant. The point is they have the world record for street cars.
OK, to keep this kinda short, I'm just going to bottom line this for you real quick. It's not really Idera's job to make sure you understand the details of their benchmarks. That's my job. Idera's job is to put nice big headlines up saying 'world record benchmark' so you'll see that and buy their code.
I speak out against this kind of chicanery when I can because I honestly believe it's wrong. If they wanted an honest benchmark that would stand the test of production, they would have used SCSI. Their hardware platform is something that nobody will be able to reproduce, so their results will never be reproduced either. DBAs are going to be wondering why they aren't seeing the awesome results they read in the benchmark.
So for the record there is no world record benchmark here. It's just a marketing device used to catch your eye and steer you away from the fact that Idera is about as fast as everyone else. The data and compression level also play a huge role in these types of benchmarks too. A while back I did a comparison benchmark between LiteSpeed and Idera and depending on the data I used, and the compression level, each one of them was able to beat the other one at different times. That's just the nature of the game. So, what's likely here is they're probably using something similar to SAP data, which is easily compressible, and they probably also used their lowest compression level. I don't blame them on that part. I know the LiteSpeed guys use their lowest compression level when they do their benchmarks too. The difference is they use hardware that people are actually using in production.
I'd still like to see this benchmark done on the same data set with LiteSpeed and Red Gate, and MS native.
Here's the hardware spec:
• Intel Itanium 2 Processors
• NEC Express5800/1320Xe
• Emulex LightPulse® 4Gb/s LP11000 HBAs
• Texas Memory Systems RamSan-400
• Idera SQLsafe v3.0
• Microsoft SQL Server 2005
• Windows 2003 Datacenter Edition
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on June 7, 2006 06:59 PM
May 17, 2006
Some of you may remember at the end of last year I said I would be keeping my eye on a company called SQL Farms. Today I have my first update on their progress.
They've got an editor that has tons of very rich functionality, but one of my favorites is the server grouping. What it does is allow you to group servers and/or databases together and then simultaneously run queries against them as a group. So you could pull back job info on all of your production servers at once with a single query. The results pane even aggregates the results for you. There are many other features you'll find useful, but rather than spin a bunch of cycles on explaining it to you myself, I'll just relay to you what they sent me.
If anyone has any questions on the product feel free to write me and if I don't know the answer, I'll get you a contact at SQLFarms who does. Anyway, here's the feature list in their own words.
SQL Farm Combine™ is a code deployment and change management tool, built into a rich-feature integrated development environment (IDE). The main advantage of SQL Farm Combine™ is that it allows enterprises to automate and build processes around the Dev <=> QA <=> Production lifecycle of SQL code releases, where the three environments are either connected or disconnected (disconnected environments reflects the fact that developers do not have access to the QA or production servers, and software engineers in QA do not have access to the Production machines). Another key benefit of SQL Farm Combine™ is that it supports SQL code deployment (queries, scripts) onto any number of databases and servers in parallel (patent-pending technology), therefore Combine is extremely useful for deploying code and/or running queries on multiple databases and servers at the same time in small to very-large SQL server environments. As an example, SQL Farm Combine™ Beta participants included companies with anywhere from 5 to 270 SQL servers.
Novel features of SQL Farm Combine:
Change management and deployment
1. Code packaging: SQL Farm Combine™ allows developers to collaborate and work together on their SQL releases. Once the SQL code is composed, developers then build a single code package for their release, which contains SQL scripts and maps each script to a set of target databases, on any number of servers.
2. Easy package transfer between development, QA, and Production, and a single-click package deployment on all target databases and servers: Code packages are constructed and configured once by the developers. Packages are then sent to QA and Production, and can be deployed by a click of button against all the appropriate target databases and servers, without requiring package reconfiguration. Furthermore, before deploying the package in QA or Production databases, software engineers in QA and Production DBAs can open the package, view the package content, choose which package scripts (if any) will not be run against the target databases and servers, or instruct the tool to deploy the package on only a sub-set of the configured target databases and servers.
3. Transacted or non-transacted code deployment: With SQL Farm Combine™, users can auto-compose code packages by selecting the database objects to be deployed. Using Combine’s feature-rich scripting dialogs, users can choose whether database changes will be made under a single transaction, or will not be transacted at all. When transactions are used, if any errors occur on the target databases during code deployment (i.e., package execution), all changes are then automatically rolled back.
4. Deployment verification results: All results returned from target databases and servers during the deployment of a code package (including result sets, warnings, errors, execution plans, etc.) can be saved into a single proprietary file. This file can then be returned to QA engineers or developers, and can be opened using the Combine application on their workstations, to view and examine all results and possible issues that arose during package execution.
5. Complete source control support: During package and project development, developers can collaborate and coordinate the composition of code packages by using source control features in Combine.
6. Easy configuration and maintenance: SQL Farm Combine™ can be configured once and by a single developer, using rich wizards and configuration options. All configuration values and parameters can then be exported and then imported by other developers, QA software engineers, and Production DBAs.
7. Executing code packages from the command line: Users and developers can configure Combine packages and then initiate package execution by invoking Combine from the command line with all appropriate parameters.
Distributed parallel data access
8. Running queries and scripts on multiple databases on any number of servers in parallel: SQL Farm Combine™ allows users to configure groups of target databases and store all configurations for future use. Users can then run scripts and queries against multiple databases and servers in parallel, and receive aggregated results from all target databases, as well as execution plans, messages, and all other outputs from each target database.
9. Compare execution plans returned from multiple databases: When running queries against multiple databases in parallel, Combine users can easily compare estimated or actual execution plans returned from each target database.
General features
10.1. Configurable interfaces – windows and components within the SQL Farm Combine™ user-interface can be customized by the user, docked in different locations in the application, and rearranged according to the user needs.
10.2. Intellisense, InfoTips, and Auto-Complete – SQL Farm Combine™ contains a built-in SQL and T-SQL code compiler that helps developers with Intellisense, InfoTips, and auto-complete features while they write SQL code. Unlike other tools that provide intellisense features for SELECT and other simple statements, SQL Farm Combine™ supports intellisense and auto-complete of all DBCC, SET, and many other (both simple and complex) SQL and T-SQL commands.
10.3. Code snippets – SQL Farm Combine™ includes many code snippets and templates that allow users to instantiate and embed them in their SQL code. Combine snippets are automated in the sense that users can easily replace code references with desired object names.
10.4. Context sensitive SQL and T-SQL help and language reference by Microsoft® – As we all know, Microsoft® help files and help content are non-redistributable. To overcome this difficulty and provide users with the latest Microsoft® SQL and T-SQL help, Combine™ contains SQL and T-SQL context sensitive help that redirects users to the appropriate Microsoft® books-online Web pages.
10.5. Saving grid data - Result sets displayed in SQL Farm Combine™ grids can be saved as an excel file, csv file, XML file, or can written to a SQL database.
10.6. Rich editor features – Editing features include outlining, book-marking, line numbering, auto-commenting, word coloring, and many other user-friendly features.
10.7. Rich-feature object browser – Combine’s object browser includes all the standard features available in other IDE application, topped by the ability to register multiple servers at the same time, validating the registration of multiple servers by connecting to all servers in parallel to save time, as well as the ability to import/export all object browser settings.
10.8. Execution plans – Estimated and actual execution plans can be presented graphically, as result sets, or as text (as returned from SQL server). Extended details regarding each node in the execution plan are available as well, and details can be copied and pasted as text to other applications.
10.9. Many other usability features, such as rich user-interfaces, wizards, dialogs, and so on, throughout the application.
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on May 17, 2006 01:49 PM
May 02, 2006
There's been a bit of buzz around lately(again) about methods companies are using to retain their IT staff longer. It would seem that in general the American business community is starting to realize that rotating out the people who run your infrastructure every 6mos is a bad idea, and actually ends up costing more money than keeping them. The articles I've been reading are more about IT staff in general, but I'm going to make this about DBAs since this is a database blog.
Here are the articles I've seen recently:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1944403,00.asp
http://www.optimizemag.com/article/square_off.jhtml?articleId=174401933
This just happens to be one of my hot buttons and I have a lot to say about it. So, if you're a CEO, CIO, or the like, pay attention because I'm about to tell you what your staff is really thinking and what they're afraid to say to you directly.
For starters, let's talk about incentives. Free in-house training, CBTs, tuition reimbursement programs, and everything in that general category don't mean squat. Most DBAs don't have time to go to college outside of work, so offering us tuition reimbursement is an empty gesture.
Bonuses are good. However, they can't be whimsical. Be regular with the bonuses, and be generous. You're not paying us for doing a good job, you're paying us to show how much you appreciate that we're sticking around and continuing to do a good job. Along with bonuses, think raises next. Raises are how you tell us you want us to not start looking for a job. It's been a standard for several years now... DBAs typically give themselves a nice, fat raise every year or so by switching jobs. And that 2% you like to give us isn't going to cut it. Don't even think about coming to the table with anything less than 7%. Anything else says you don't care whether we stay or go.
Here's another hint for you. My time is just as important as yours. I'm getting very offended that I have to choose between feeding my family and raising them. I was recently looking for a job and I turned down several gigs where the company expected me to be in the office 9-12hrs a day. I've got a family... that's unacceptable. Even worse is the support trade-off. When we as DBAs are expected to provide 24/7 support, you're expected to give the rigid schedule a break. Again, I've had a few jobs where I was expected to drop whatever I was doing to answer a support issue. I'm at the movies with the kids, stop and go fix the DB. I'm at the park with my family, or at a party, stop and go fix the DB. Even in the middle of a New Year's Eve party(true story), stop and go fix the DB. Yet, companies continually expect that all of their businees we're taking care of during OUR time should have no effect on my office time. Don't ever step up to me and ask me to provide after hours support and expect me to not take care of some of my personal business during your normal work day. In short... MY time is just as important as yours, and I'm not going to choose between being with my family, and feeding them.
Here's probably the biggest thing you can do to keep your DBAs around. Start a company-wide campaign to even pretend to give a crap about us. I honestly can't count the number of times I've worked for a company for years only to be tossed aside for a cheaper, less-experienced DBA. I'm always the top producer in my department... always. And to have the company I'm spending my nights thinking about improving just throw me away because they want to save 10K, is not only an insult, it proves that you don't care about me as a person. Now, I happen to know that the company I just left is in pretty big trouble database-wise since I left. And I can only assume that the rest were too. You can't get around keeping senior people. You need us. And if we're going to put our time, effort, thoughts, weekends, late nights, etc into making your company run better, and increase the quality of service and product you give your customers, then we deserve a little consideration. No, I take that back... we deserve a Lot of consideration.
One more thing before I get off my rant here. say it with me... flex-time. Practically every company has VPN, and there's no reason why DBAs can't do part of their work from home. They're typically more productive because they have fewer distractions. Give it a try. The ones who prove themselves unworthy get the right taken away, but for those of us who work extra hard from home so we don't lose the right... let us. Trust me on this one. Your DBAs will be far more likely to stick around if you show them a little consideration.
So, if you want us to stick around longer than just a few months, then say it with cash, and say it with perks. And remember, 401K matching and tuition reimbursement aren't perks.
Ok, I'm done.
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on May 2, 2006 05:19 PM
April 27, 2006
Embarcadero announced today that they're partnering with DBE Software. They want to use their Schema Examiner to add functionality to ERStudio and RapidSQL.
What this does is analyze database models from a design perspective and provides recommendations based off of key elements. As with benchmarking, data modeling is one of my diatribes, and it's really a lost skill. Nobody really understands the modeling process anymore, nor do they really understand the relational concepts. Schema Exmainer's 'Teach Me' functionality will examine the model for you and tell you what's potentially wrong with it and why. Even for experienced modelers this can be a huge benefit because it's very difficult to reverse-engineer a model with 300+ tables and getting started is quite often the hardest part. Also, if you don't know the data very well it can also be very difficult to analyze the model.
Schema Examiner bridges this gap, and while it doesn't always catch every problem with a schema, it will take you a long way in getting started. I wouldn't just blindly make all the changes suggested, but I would use them as a reference as I went through the model myself. I find that schema problems are usually consistent, so whenever you find a problem in a table, the same problem usually exists in a lot of the others as well and Schema Examiner will be good at determining those system-wide performance killers.
In my opinion, this is the only real advantage ERWin users have had over ERStudio users for a long time. Especially with the new release of ERStudio, it is very quickly leaving ERWin in the dust. ERStudio already leaves ERWin buried in the usability category. It's GUI is much nicer, and the way it implements common functionality is much more user friendly. This new functionality will finally close that functionality gap that Embarcadero so desperately needed.
The major functionality list is below:
• Comprehensive Diagnostics and Reporting. Schema Examiner analyzes the schema’s data structure and generates graphic documentation of the entire database structure. The diagnostic can be customized.
• Design Discrepancy Isolation. The innovative “Show Me” facility isolates specific design issues in complex data models, eliminating the task of sifting through thousands of lines of code.
• Improved Productivity and Accuracy. A comprehensive set of diagnostics validates database design, recommends improvements, and automatically generates scripts to quickly execute design changes.
• Maximize Design Efficiency. Schema Examiner allows users to check and validate alterations to a database design, as well as simulate design changes before implementing them.
• Increase database performance by identifying violations of best practices that adversely affect performance. Suggested changes are scripted for easy implementation.
• “Teach Me” Facility. In addition to providing specific diagnostic and recommendations, the solution explains reveals the impact of design choices or modifications in light of Relational Theory.
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on April 27, 2006 07:26 AM
April 25, 2006
Scalability Experts Sells DBStress
Idera has just released a new benchmarking utility called SQLScaler. The product has a useful data explosion feature that accompanies its benchmarking features.
I heard on the grapevine that they were about to release, so I contacted Idera a couple weeks ago about including them in a benchmarking piece I'm doing, and they denied that they had any such product in the works. My guess is that they're not up to par with the other products on the market like Quest Benchmark Factory and Mercury LoadRunner so they may be trying to keep a low profile... but that's just a guess.
I have managed to get a hold of a trial though, and I loaded it up on one of my servers. I was surprised to find that I had seen this tool before. It took me a minute to remember where, but it's actually a tool called DBStress, and it was written by Scalability Experts. I saw a demo of this product at the Scalability Experts office here in Dallas a couple years ago. At that point they were talking about shipping the product themselves. I suppose they just wanted to stay out of the software business.
Anyway though, I'm going to give this product a look and tell you anything you need to know.
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on April 25, 2006 11:27 AM
April 20, 2006
For those of you were putting your eggs in the Quickshift basket, you'd better have a backup plan because the rumor I hear is that they just went under.
Quickshift was a company that developed a memory compression technology that was supposed to revolutionize the database world by increasing server performance by orders of magnitude. I figured they had some problems getting things off the ground, but when I met with the CEO earlier this year, it sounded like things were going to be ok for them. I guess the SQL world just isn't ready to be shifted that direction.
There is a place for memory compression though. IBM uses memory compression to offset the overhead from their new row-level data compression in Viper. I think there will continue to be a use for compression technology, but as we see here, it's going to have to be used sparingly.
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on April 20, 2006 03:23 PM
April 04, 2006
Why are the Backup Wars Important?
I've been talking off and on for a while now about the database backup wars, but what I haven't done is explain why they're important to begin with.
Well, for starters, there are two big issues: space and usability.
Space:
Databases are getting bigger and bigger, and as cheap as disk is these days, it's still very expensive to house all the backups you need to keep online. So there's a huge need for compressed backups, not only for the disk savings, but also to ease the increased network usage created by the backup process.
Usability:
There are other utilities out there that perform the same basic functions as the backup tools I've been talking about. Tools like ArcServe and Backup Exec can compress and encrypt backups as well, but they have one major disadvantage... you have to manage the entire process from within their own interface. The tools I'm talking about allow DBAs to manage the entire process from the SQL Server interface using the same tools and methods they use with the native SQL Server processes. They also have repositories that you can use to report on different stats including failures, operation length, etc.
As well, these tools allow you to convert the compressed backup files back to a native file format. So, what you get is the advantage of compressing your backups while maintaining control over the process.
Some of these tools also have advanced features that tools like ArcServe and the like don't. For instance, Quest Litespeed has object-level restore which is something that nobody else has.
Right now, everyone has pretty much mastered the backup engines and they all perform very well. So the war now has moved from speed and stability to price and features.
So, you should really care about how these wars come out because it's going to matter. And before you buy any of these tools, especially from Quest or Idera, always insist on a discount. There's no reason to pay full price for any of them because they're too expensive as it is.
Read my book reviews at:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on April 4, 2006 09:28 PM
April 03, 2006
I know a lot of you think that the database backup wars are finished, and for a while there, so did I. But, Quest is making sure that it's alive and well.
The war has been going on for a couple years now, and I'll briefly summarize the whole thing for you so you'll know a little about it.
1. Imceda Litespeed comes on the scene with backup compression and encryption.
2. Idera releases SQLSafe, a product that competes directly with Litespeed, and wages a very aggressive campaign against Imceda.
3. Red-gate buys MiniSQLBackup from Yeoh Ray Mond and turns it into SQL Backup.
OK, commentary so far. Litespeed had the entire market for a long time, then Idera came in and priced their tool much lower, so that forced Imceda to carve their niche in the higher end market and drastically lower their prices to compete with Idera in the mid-range and lower end markets. Unfortunately, Red-gate's appearance swept the low end market away from Idera, who frankly had a stronger hold on it than Imceda to begin with, so there's no loss there for Imceda. The problem was that even though Idera was a lot cheaper than Imceda, Reg-gate was significantly cheaper than everyone. This left Imceda with the higher market practically to themselves, while they were able to compete easily with Idera for the mid-range market. Idera really got the raw end because they didn't have a clear market. Red-gate squeezed them out of the low-end market effectively, while Imceda continually bashed them in the higher-end, and even some in the mid-range.
4. Walter Scott sells Imceda to Quest Software.
5. Everyone continues to add features and get small bugs worked out.
OK, more commentary...
Imceda selling to Quest was a very important move because it gave them a lot of breathing room for the price wars. They now had the backing of a much larger company with virtually limitless resources, which means they could lower their price to anything they needed to win any given contract. This way they could gain a stronger hold in the market and not have to worry about profits. It also meant that they were making almost nothing on very large sales.
6. Red-Gate releases an enterprise version of SQL Backup that contains a central repository.
That last one is the most important to our discussion today. It's because of this that Quest has been forced to re-work their pricing strategy.
Quest now has a multi-tiered pricing structure for Litespeed and it should really compete nicely with Red-Gate's low prices. What they've done is give you the ability to pay based on the size of your database. I'm having trouble getting specifics out of them, but I know the price can get very low.
The big question is, does this really put Quest in front of its competitors? It really depends on how you look at it. If you've got a fairly static environment, or at least very slow growth, then you could save a lot of money licensing this way. If you've got a very dynamic environment, you could spend more time upgrading licenses than actually doing DB work. In that case however, you'd probably just buy the high-end license to begin with.
Does Quest offer anything outside of features though? Well, for mixed shops the future is promising, but right now Quest has sat on the ball so long there's really no use counting on it. See, they've been promising Litespeed for Oracle, DB2, and MySQL for over a year now, but we still haven't seen anything. If Quest would step up, then there would be a huge advantage for mixed shops to choose Litespeed because they would have a cross-platform solution that would tie their entire environment together.
For now though, we wait.
Visit my book review site:
http://www.ITBookworm.com
Posted by Sean McCown on April 3, 2006 09:27 PM
March 24, 2006
Embarcadero's Benchmarking on Hold
I continue to be on a benchmarking kick until companies start giving it the attention it deserves.
I had looked at Embarcadero's benchmarking tool, Extreme Test last year. In general, it's a good tool, but it's on hold.
Extreme Test's capabilities are nothing short of amazing. It has the ability to do pretty much anything you need it to do including results-based testing, and creating reports that automatically compare results between tests. The functionality is too rich to go into much detail here, but trust me when I say it's an asset to your QA efforts.
The one problem that has plagued Extreme Test from the beginning though is it's difficulty. When I started working with it, I found it extremely difficult to run even the simplest benchmarks. The main reason for this is that not only does Extreme Test expose the javascript for you, it actually requires you to be able to write the code yourself. Most mortal DBAs and QA people can't write javascript that well, which is why we're buying the tool to begin with.
I personally questioned their choice to leave ODBC and OLEDB out of their provider line-up. They can only make direct database connections using JDBC, which is a huge shortcoming.
Embarcadero has recognized all of this as well, and has temporarily halted the marketing and sale of the product. They are going to re-tool and re-release in the future. They weren't able to give me even a vague timeline, but I'm confident they will let me know when we can expect something and I'll pass that on to you.
All I can say is, good for you Embarcadero. I'm so tired of companies recognizing that a product is bad and continuing to sell it.
They're being very responsible about this, and I respect that.
Posted by Sean McCown on March 24, 2006 09:01 AM
TOP STORIES
Hyperconnected users growingSteve Jobs to keynote WWDC
CSC settles kickbacks case
MS previews SMB software
What does HP-EDS really mean?
Mac Office 2008 SP1 released
HP buys EDS for $13.9 billion
Corporate IT spending slows
MS targets smartphone market
Sun to clarify JavaFX plan
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
- Application Security: Threats and How to Counter Them
- Why Linux Threats Mean Business
- Virtualization: A Step by Step Approach to Success
- Is your smaller organization ready for High Availability?
- Is system maintenance doing more harm than good?
- Virtual Test Lab Automation: Manage development infrastructure
