Category: Editorial

  • The Human Touch

    How often does human error cause issues? Recently we had a rocket crash in Russia,there have been numerous incidents of drone crashes as more and more unmanned aircraft take to the skies, and a few years ago we had an Air France disaster that might have been cause by humans making poor decisions or engaging the wrong controls. Those are incidents where the wrong button press has large consequences, either in physical damage or the loss of life.

    Many of us make mistakes constantly as we work in the various tools and environments we need throughout our day. We click the wrong button in SSMS, we connect to the wrong server and run a script, or we fail to test a change. All of these are mistakes made by humans, and often are mistakes that can be prevented if we did a better job or sticking to routines and processes. That can be hard, but perhaps checklists can help here, along with some double checks by coworkers.

    That’s why I think using scripts in T-SQL, and using the Script button in SSMS to generate the code that you can run (and save) is the best way to work with your servers. As much as I think Powershell (PoSh) can be a pain to write and debug, there’s a good argument to be made for using it when performing complex administrative tasks, especially across servers. Using code rather than forms and buttons is just a better way to accurately and consistently make changes in a controller manner.

    This is an area where everyone could work more efficiently. Developers are usually used to working with version control systems and tracking all their changes. However they often will make configuration changes to their machines, SQL Server, IIS, or some other software, and forget to track the changes. Making these changes in code, through T-SQL or PoSh, and tracking these items in VCS, would help with smoothing software deployments. DBAs and other operations staff should learn to use version control systems  as well, helping to track down root causes to issues.

    Ultimately humans are often the weaknesses in most systems. We should understand that, accept it, and compensate as best we can.

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones Windows Media Video ( 15.5MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 19.7MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 3.9MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center

  • Less QA?

    Throughout most of my career, people have complained that software is never tested enough, not tested well, and certainly not enough time is allocated in project plans. I’d also argue that all too often we don’t have people building software with experience in how to perform extensive testing. Most developers only have a rudimentary knowledge of software testing and that part of their skill set doesn’t receive constant training. However I’ve found plenty of QA people that were in the same situation. Some educate themselves and learn how to test better, but many go through the motions. They don’t take pride in their role as a software tester.

    There have been lots of advances in automated testing and TDD methodologies over the years, which means that developers have been taking more of the responsibility, and effort, for testing code. It’s hard to know if this has resulted in higher quality code, lower quality, or a mix. Overall I think that the latter is likely. Code quality is all over the board, probably based more on the skill and talent of the individual developer than on any process.

    That’s good for the companies that have hired strong developers, but not so great for our industry as a whole. We still produce lots of software that takes too long to develope, costs too much, and often has too many bugs. Overall we are sloppy and inconsistent in how we build software. Some of that is the nature of our business, one with such a low bar of entry that anyone can give software development a try.

    I don’t know how we improve the quality of software, though I do think continuing to educate and train people on what works well is a good start. However I also think that we still need QA groups. We need people that will use software in ways that automated tests won’t. People that will press buttons, enter values, and push software in ways that developers would never consider using it. Most of all, we need QA and testing to be treated as a valuable part of our industry. We need QA people that view testing as a valid career path, not a stepping stone for junior developers that look to move on as soon as possible.

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones Windows Media Video ( 15.7MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 20.2MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 3.9MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center

  • Data Farming

    This editorial was originally published on Oct 13, 2008. It is being re-run as Steve is out today, traveling to a SQL in the City event and SQL Saturday in Sacramento.

    It’s a fictional story, or at least I hope it is, but Bruce Schneier has a great piece on Identity Farming, a long term way to create false identities that would fit great in the spy world. Mr. Schneier doesn’t see a practical point in doing it, but it’s interesting from a data standpoint because he brings up a point. This could be done without a real person existing to back up all the data that’s created.

    The part that strikes me from this piece is that all too often we make assumptions about the people or entities that created all the data we use. One bad foreign key, orphaned child row, or incorrectly transformed piece of data could snowball downhill at a tremendous rate and it might be hard to determine what is wrong.

    The blog entry talks about our data shadows, which grow larger and larger all the time. Unless you are actively trying to limit yours, every day that are likely new entries in some database about your life. And more and more, various companies and institutions interact with our data shadows instead of us. Credit checks, marketing efforts, when we board an airplane or make a purchase, all of these require checks on the shadow of data in our lives, not necessarily ensuring that the shadow is tightly linked to each of us.

    I’ve had more than my share of confusion because of my name; it’s common, in almost every database, and shared by thousands, if not millions of people. On on hand it means that I’m a little lost in the flood of “Steve Joneses” out there. On the other hand it makes it hard to correct mistakes. If there are 6 people with the same name and you have an orphaned record, who do you link it to? Do you guess? Infer it from the other data? I’d like to think you need to somehow research this, contact me, and make a note that the quality of this data could be suspect.

    People working with information try to be accurate, but they get busy, and mistakes occur. I’m sure I’ll find more and more over time, and I don’t have a great solution for what might work better. I’d like to think that we would implement better checks for data quality, fuzzy searches, and somehow assign “risk” values to data. Something to let people know that there might have been some issue.

    It’s a thorny problem, one that’s not going away, and likely to become more problematic in the future.

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones Windows Media Video ( 34.9MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 30.1MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 5.8MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center

  • Moving to the Heartland

    This editorial was originally published on Oct 17, 2008. It is being republished as Steve is on vacation.

    This is kind of a US-based editorial, but I suspect that it applies in other countries as well. I caught this article about data center growth in Iowa, traditionally a farming state in the US. Iowa is making efforts to attract companies, including large ones like Microsoft and Google, to built data centers within its borders.

    Quite a few data centers have been built lately in the middle of the US, in non-traditional IT or Telecom power areas. Not that some big cities haven’t gotten data centers as well, but it seems more and more that data centers are being built in out-of-the way places. I’ve seen Google add data centers in Oregon and Iowa, Microsoft adding them in Boulder and Dublin, as well as Quincy, Washington. Microsoft has added some large ones in big cities like Chicago and San Antonio as well.

    It’s interesting that as we grow more and more, and with greater needs to be connected and in contact with each other that our technological advances have leveled the cost of entry into many industries. The publishing and music industries are struggling as every person can become their own producer, publisher, distributor, and talent. No longer does a musician need to move to Los Angeles or New York to get noticed. And no longer does a writer need to struggle along hoping to get a book contract. In both cases the Internet and various on-demand technologies enable each person to get their own content out into the real world and sell it themselves.

    For those of us working in technology, it means that Silicon Valley and other technological hotbeds are not necessarily the place we need to live. More and more people are forgoing the need to build their business in a large city and instead doing it where they want to live. A company today might pick a place where the founder grew up, or where they went to school, or some other criteria.

    Just as cities grew by attracting businesses to the places with large and diverse workforces, now small towns can do the same, by offering different types of amenities, tax structures, and more. And with large companies like Google and Microsoft helping to invest in some of these places, it might be that your next high-tech job is in someplace like Boulder, CO, which has seen tremendous data center growth.

    Maybe I should even consider dedicating an acre or two out here at the ranch for a small data center. Anyone want to come work in Elbert County, CO?

    Steve Jones

    Video and Audio versions

    Today’s podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

    Follow Steve Jones on Twitter to find links and database related items and announcements.
    Steve Jones Windows Media Video ( 32.9MB) feed

    MP4 iPod Video ( 27.5MB) feed

    MP3 Audio ( 5.6MB) feed

    Feeds are available at iTunes and Mevio

    To submit an article, rant or editorial,
    log in to the Contribution Center