Voice of the DBA

Author: way0utwest

  • A Software Warranty

    pocket knife
    Shouldn’t software developers give a warranty we can potentially void?

    Years ago I worked in a large company on the operations team. We were responsible for all production issues for the 6,000 people and the assorted machines, devices, and applications that come with a large workforce. There was a department that was aligned with our group that focused on engineering and various development groups that built different applications. The engineering group was good at working closely with the production team to ensure smooth deployments, but they weren’t on call and would at times respond slowly to develop solutions when problems occurred. They were, however, better than the development groups who often sent code to be deployed, and accepted bug reports back, but provided little support or assistance for problems with their code.

    I ran across this link from a DevOps person called You Write It, You Support It in the Brent Ozar, PLF newsletter. The piece makes a case for the problems that occur with some deployments, like a lack of, or surplus, of logging, switches to turn features on/off, error handling, and more. It’s a pretty good description of typical problems I’ve often seen, and it calls for developers to support the features that they write, even in production systems.

    I like this idea, though I don’t think that it should be a continuous expectation with developers required to support their code forever. I would like to see developers giving their code a “warranty” of sorts, perhaps a couple months of priority support when code is deployed into live environments with developers taking responsibility and responding to calls, even after hours.

    There are arguments to be made that developers’ time is better spent enhancing applications and applying their creativity to new ideas, but this leads to a human frailty. Too often we view a job finished as a job completed, and that’s not always the case. Doing a job well means more than completion. It implies a level of craftsmanship and pride in the finished product, both from the developer and the client.

    Developers should write code that works. If it doesn’t, then it’s not really finished and should be fixed. With that contract in place, we usually find that the developer spends a bit more time ensuring the product is built in a quality way that reduces the need for much support.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcasts

    We publish three versions of the podcast each day for you to enjoy.

  • Unprofessional Employers

    Professional SQL SErver
    Would your employer pay for this book?

    Is your employer unprofessional?

    It’s Friday, and that’s the poll question based on this blog post. In the post, Mark Rendle talks about the fact that  we are all responsible for our professional development and career, but a professional employer understands they should also be making an investment in their developers. He disagrees with Uncle Bob Martin who says that we are solely and completely responsible for our own learning and education.

    My view is similar to Mark’s in that I think we are ultimately responsible, but that employers should bear some burden of investment in their staff, especially as they evolve and change their technology platforms. If you are hired to be a SQL Server 2008 DBA, the company can’t expect you to be skilled in SQL Server 2012 and handle deployments as soon as the product is released. A company can expect you to put some effort into learning the new platform, and perhaps over time understand how it differs from previous versions, but if the company wants you to gain that knowledge quicker, they need to invest in your knowledge themselves.

    A professional employer understands that, and is willing to put some investment into you, usually if you show some initiative and effort to learn on your own, or make your own investment (time and/or money) into improving your skills.

    I’ve been fairly lucky in that most of my employers in the past were willing to invest in me. Even the ones with very limited training budgets would provide some supplemental help if I showed them my own plan for increasing my skills. It might have been reimbursement for a book, a spare computer, or even just some time at work to spend learning something new. My current employer is one of the best, offering lots of training. Now if I could just find the time to take advantage of it ….

    Let us know this week if you have a professional employer.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcasts

    We publish three versions of the podcast each day for you to enjoy.

  • Windows Server 2012 and Hyper-V

    hyper-v
    Hyper-V looks like a great candidate for almost any SQL Server with the enhancements in Windows Server 2012.

    I recently went to a Microsoft event in Denver on Windows Server 2012 and Hyper-V improvements. A bunch of the information was presented by Harold Wong (b | t) and there’s a number of demos and notes from the talks on his blog.

    I haven’t looked much at the Windows server OS’s in years and not much at Hyper-V. I have preferred VMWare for my demo/research environments, especially as I move between Windows and OSX regularly. However I’ve thought Hyper-V was rapidly improving and on the right track. I was surprised to find the new limits in Hyper-V under Windows Server 2012 to be quite high for both the host OS and the guests. You can have up to

    • 64 virtual processors
    • 1TB RAM
    • 64TB (vhdx format)
    • 4 virtual Fibre Channel adapters
    • much more

    With 320 logical processors and 4TB of ram on the host, it seems as though Hyper-V is on par with VmWare ESX 5. There’s a lot more to look at than software cost, but at this time, it appears all new virtualization projects using Windows ought to consider Hyper-V.

    There were interesting demos on replicas, live migration, improvements in file transfers and more. They were designed to make things look good, and there’s a good marketing presentation on the capabilities. I’m sure the actual implementation isn’t as easy or smooth as in the talks, but it did make me think there’s no reason virtualization shouldn’t be considered for SQL Servers, especially as you move to newer hardware.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcasts

    We publish three versions of the podcast each day for you to enjoy.

  • On Source Control

    A mention today from Jamie Thomson in his blog on source control. I left a comment, but it was long, so I thought I’d repost it here.

    My comment

    Thanks for the note, Jamie, and it’s interesting, but I don’t see any respondents that aren’t using VSC. I’m guessing many people don’t want to admit that.

    I use source control, sort of. I don’t have a lot of production code, mostly demo stuff, which doesn’t change so much as gets scrapped and restarted. However I am using Subversion (Turtle interface) with Red Gate’s SQL Source Control (of course).

    Why? Well, since I have a 1:1 with my boss today, I should mention Red Gate makes a fantastic product that I couldn’t do without. Actually I think I’m bound to use it since I work for Red gate, but even if I didn’t, it makes things easier.

    I built this habit at a startup, with Visual SourceSafe, and 6 months of browbeating developers to actually check out code from VSS, do a File | Open in Enterprise Manager (SQL 2k at the time), make changes, save the code, and check it back in. It can be done manually, and should, but there are tools like Red Gate’s products that make it easier.

    I know lots of people just edit code in SSMS/VS without controlling it, and that’s a mistake if you are trying to work in a team environment, and product quality software. I haven’t had to roll back often, but there are times we have needed to, and not having control was an issue.

    As an anecdote, I had a job once, waaaayyy back in the last century, using SQL 6.5. The developers had done a great job of using source control for all ASP, VB6, and SQL code. The problem was that they had checked out the code, saved it locally, copied it to another folder, and then checked it in. Then they might check back in the original script that was checked out. Or they might check the original back in and forget the modified version. Or they might not check anything in.

    We found 3, 4, even 7 copies of some stored procedures on various desktops and shared drives, and they had decided to encrypt all the code on the SQL Server. We were never quite sure what version was deployed where, and deployments of the "latest" versions from VSC broke functionality.

    We ended up decrypting all code, and reloading it into VCS, while removing all copies of local storage. It isn’t enough just to use source control or implement something; you need to understand what you are doing and do it consistently. Tools help here, so please use something.

    A Couple More Thoughts

    Source control is insurance. It’s risk reduction, but something that most people don’t understand or think they need. They may not. If you never have a server crash, or a hack of your data, then you don’t need backups. However most people wouldn’t want to run their systems, especially the ones they care about, without backups.

    It’s the same with source control. Use something to provide yourself with a fallback if you have issues.

    It’s not hard, there are lots of tools out there, and they make it easy to conform to some process. You can use SQL Source Control or SQL Connect from my company, or use something else, but integrate your database code with source control.