Voice of the DBA

Author: way0utwest

  • Database Checkups

    I am most definitely a fan of continuous delivery (CD) and the idea that we have the ability to both release our software at any time, for any change, but also have the process and mindset in place to rapidly push enhancements and patches through our development process. However I’m also no naive enough to think that the processes of Agile, Lean, Scrum, Continuous Integration, or any other methodology make this happen. It requires belief and effort by your entire team, including management, to evolve your software quicker.

    There is a downside. The faster, and more often, you release changes to your production system, the more likely you are to cause an issue. This isn’t really any different from traditional waterfall processes, which also cause issues in production, but it does mean that the perception of issues is a bit changed. People expect higher quality when they implement a CD process, and while quality might be higher (there is debate on this), it certainly isn’t perfect.

    Walgreens has implemented a CD process, and they rapidly deploy changes, but they’ve also had issues. In fact, there’s a piece that talks about an issue during a database deployment, and offers some guidance on preparation to deal with problems in your deployment process. The ideas of monitoring (which is critical), planning for recovery, coordinating development, etc are all things that we need to do in any production environment, but they are especially important in a CD process where people expect changes quickly. Whether those changes are enhancing the application, or rolling back a problematic deployment, they need to happen quickly.

    Over time, which may be decades, I expect that more and more organizations and end users will expect patches and changes to their software to happen in the background, while the system is being used. This might mean we need to plan for application architectures with sections that can be upgraded separately, or maybe we will develop ways to modify executable code without ending the process. In either case, the ideas behind CD will become more and more useful, and the more you understand them, the better off you’ll be.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 2.5MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and LibSyn.

  • PASS Rocks SQL Saturday

    I had another piece that looked at some issues with PASS slated for today, but it’s been a tough morning. Both with work, and with the conflict with PASS, so I’m going to move this up and give PASS more praise. As conflicted as I am about the organization, it does amazing things for the community.

    SQL Saturday #318 – Orlando

    I remember when Andy first pitched me on this idea. I was dubious, but we talked about it over months and finally got the first event running in Orlando on Nov 10, 2007.

    This weekend, starting already with pre-cons, is the EIGHTH SQL Saturday in Orlando, SQL Saturday #318.

    8!!

    There have been have only been 14 Summits. I went to SQL Saturday #300 a couple weeks ago. That’s amazing. Free training, probably 20+ sessions at each event, held in countries all over the world, from Brazil to Nepal.

    If that doesn’t make you smile, you don’t get community.

    Now, I know some of you will say “Andy and Steve started SQL Saturday.” True, but it was hard, it was a time sink (mostly for Andy) and while we grew a number of events, we would never have gotten this far.

    It’s mostly due to the efforts of Karla Landrum and I can’t praise her enough for the enthusiasm, excitement, and support she brings to the process.

    But it’s also PASS.

    The organization supports Karla with behind the scenes help from people at headquarters. Without their decision to absorb SQL Saturday and promote it, market it, support local organizers, this would not have grown as it has.

    If you search the hashtag, you’ll find some amazing notes. Tweets, excitement, blog posts, and more. If you have been to an event, then you get it. You know how amazing this is and you should thank the people that work and volunteer for PASS.

    If you haven’t been, you’re missing out.

    Go. Give it a try. Carpool to one near you. Help organize one with your user group. You’ll be amazed.

    PASS has done something special with SQL Saturday and they deserve a lot of praise and credit.

  • Is SQL Server Mature?

    When I asked recently what compelling reasons there are, or aren’t, for upgrading SQL Server, it seems cost was the issue for most people. I can understand that, especially as licensing for VMs has made it an expensive endeavor to upgrade their systems. Many, many companies have started to revisit their policies regarding upgrades and seriously evaluate the decision to undertake a version change. While I’m not sure if many companies are starting to look at keeping all instances of SQL Server for ten years, I know many are looking to keep their noncritical systems on the existing versions as long as possible.

    As I read through the posts on my piece, I found this great quote from one of the commenter: “I’m a great believer in “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” and so if a system is running acceptably for it’s purpose, I’ll leave it alone.” To a large extent, that’s how I’ve viewed systems. If things are working, it becomes hard to justify an upgrade. In fact, I had a client that was running a SQL Server v6.5 instance in 2005, a full ten years after that version was released. Why? Mostly because the database backed a card key system that worked. While the database wasn’t supported, neither was the card key system, and since an upgrade would have been close to $100,000, it wasn’t worth performing. We did upgrade to a virtual server to remove hardware dependencies, but otherwise left the system alone.

    That brings me to this week’s question, which is one that I’ve asked myself for years: Is SQL Server mature?

    If a version of SQL Server can handle the load placed on it, is there any good reason to upgrade. I suspect that for many applications, the base features of SQL Server are good enough. If these features have performed well for a number of versions, then why change? While I like the changes in T-SQL, especially error handling, I’m not sure those changes are worth paying tens of thousands of dollars for. I’m not sure the improvements are really justified for many applications, and I’m not sure many developers can even find the time to implement them.

    More and more I think that key to continued adoption and growth of SQL Server is licensing by scale, not edition, and not by feature. Just like Azure, let me pay for the cores and RAM I need, and let me easily grow that as needed.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 2.8MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and LibSyn. 

     

  • People Helping People – Volunteers

    Continuing on with things that PASS does well, since I want to be balanced, I wanted to talk about volunteers.

    I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but PASS gets a lot of volunteers. There are volunteers that run SQL Saturdays. Volunteers that run user groups. Volunteers that help out for both of those, and volunteers that handle all sorts of tasks for the organization from picking speakers to choosing board candidates and more.

    In the past there have been people disillusioned with the usage and valuation of volunteers, but I have to say that I think PASS overall does a great job here. How else can you explain so many people willing to help out each year. They can’t all be treated poorly. Heck, most of them can’t be.

    Every year at the Summit, volunteers are recognized with in meetings and with a party. There’s even an award for the volunteer: the PASSion award.

    I greatly appreciate all the efforts of the volunteers, but I have to give credit to the organization itself for recruiting, managing, and using volunteers. There may be room for improvement, but without a doubt, something is being done right here.