Checking Myself with GenAI

I had a suggestion from somone on a place where AI helps them and I decided to try it. The person had an AI summarize their work and if the result wasn’t the intention of the author, then they know know their writing wasn’t clear.

This post looks at how that worked for me.

This is part of a series of experiments with AI systems.

Checking an Editorial

I wrote an editorial on database Devops that was published recently. I decided to have a few AIs summarize this and see if the result was what I intended. First up, Claude, with a simple prompt: summarize this text (insert here). See the top of the prompt here:

2025-05_line0025

The result is shown below and seems to be an accurate summary of the text. This is basically what I was trying to say in the piece. Of course, this isn’t much shorter than the text, but this gives me confidence here in the ability to recognize what I’ve written.

2025-05_line0027

In Perplexity, I got this result. This result is similar, but doesn’t mention the author. Instead, this is a summary of the text, not trying to give a voice to the author, which is interesting. Very close to the text above, but this seems slightly drier, taking the text as fact rather than opinion.

2025-05_line0026

Perplexity also had some related items at the bottom, which injected a prompt back into the LLM for more info.

2025-05_line0029

Last, Copilot. I have a dedicated key on my laptop for this and I pressed it and entered my prompt in the app. This result is shorter and to the point. There are some additional links to click that the bottom.

2025-05_line0028

Clicking on one of the items at the bottom injects the text and gets a new result.

2025-05_line0030

I tried this with a couple other piece of work, some of which aren’t published. In each case (3 attempts), the summary made sense. I don’t know if that means I am writing anything clearly, but it does help me get a sense of what I’ve written.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Checking Myself with GenAI

Speaking at the NYC Lunch and Learn DevOps Devour Hour

This Friday is the NYC DevOps Devour hour, which is actually 3 hours. Plus a happy hour.

I’ll be there with Kendra Little and Erik Darling talking about DevOps stuff. You can register now and join me in Manhattan from 12:00-3:00p at the 3rd Avenue Industrious office.

We’ll be talking performance problems, cloud migration, and deployment architecture. Come join us if you can.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Monday Monitor Tips: Beyond SQL Server

Redgate Monitor works with more than SQL Server. Some big changes were announced recently, and I’ll cover the highlights here.

This post looks at Redgate Monitor and the additional monitoring available for Oracle, MySQL, and MongoDB.

This is part of a series of posts on Redgate Monitor. Click to see the other posts

Growing Up

The world has been slowly growing to embrace more database platforms. Not just as a whole, but I find more and more Redgate clients have lots of different database platforms. Our 2025 State of Database Landscape report shows that while there is a little consolidation from many companies having more than 4 platforms in 2024, there are still plenty that have 2 or 3.

As a result, we’ve been working hard to bring additional capabilities to Redgate Monitor beyond SQL Server. In 2023 we announced PostgreSQL support. Just recently we also added Oracle, MySQL, and MongoDB support.

We can see this in the online monitor.red-gate.com demo site. If we scroll down to the staging group, we see both MongoDB and MySQL being monitored.

2025-05_line0038

Below these, we see Oracle 19 and 23 being monitored as well.

2025-05_line0039

If you click into any of these cards, you’ll see there is a limited amount of information now, but we have teams growing and adding the metrics on a weekly basis. Right now, Oracle shows high level metrics and queries.

2025-05_line0040

MySQL is similar

2025-05_line0042

as is MongoDB

2025-05_line0041

The supported platforms are in the docs for Oracle, MySQL, MongoDB, PostgreSQL, and SQL Server.

Summary

Redgate Monitor is growing up. I remember when it was just a small alerting system and now it’s a world class monitoring platform that is growing beyond SQL Server. If you have needs on other platforms, check it out and let us know what’s important to you.

Redgate Monitor is a world class monitoring solution for your database estate. Download a trial today and see how it can help you manage your estate more efficiently.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Monday Monitor Tips: Beyond SQL Server

The AI View From Above

It likely isn’t a surprise to many of you that executives like AI. A survey shows that 74% of executives surveyed have greater confidence in AI-generated insights than advice from colleagues or friends. At the board level, even more (85%) favor AI-driven advice.

That’s amazing to me, and while I might think this is a bit too much trust being placed in these GenAI LLMs, perhaps it’s also partially because they work with too many people who aren’t great at their jobs. Plenty of people skim through data or focus on certain things and might miss the details. While an AI can read and summarize a lot, it might not have the context we expect. I tend to be a bit skeptical of AI summaries, often because they don’t necessarily weigh the different parts of an article the same way that I do. However, they can be helpful.

Even more interesting, 44% of executives say they would trust a GenAI to override their decisions based on insights, and 38% would trust AI to make decisions on their behalf. Business decisions based on data, or conclusions from a lot of inputs are different than producing working code, so I don’t know how accurate these models might be in this context. I do know that I want experienced people reviewing and judging GenAI outputs, and I would not allow an AI to override me without my input.

However, I wouldn’t just discount a GenAI recommendation. I tend to have strong opinions, but loosely held. I’ll change if there is evidence or a good argument to do so. It’s possible a GenAI might see things I miss and produce an insight that gets me to change a decision.

What’s a bit scary about the stats from this survey is that many executives see a skills gap in their staff, and their trust in GenAI might lead them to replace or augment existing staff with more GenAI tools. They might expect hiring can be delayed or slowed (or eliminated) with GenAI filling gaps. This might be especially true as many tech companies talk about how GenAI tools are making them more efficient.

That means that tech professionals should consider a few things. First, learn to work with GenAI tools and use them to prove your value to an organization. This includes learning when not to use them. Second, continue to improve your skills to ensure you can judge Gen AI results and emphasize that you are still the expert. Lastly, as the technology improves, consider adding some skills in how to train an AI to be a better assistant for you. The more efficient you are, especially with a GenAI helper, the more likely you are to impress executives and managers that are choosing which staff to keep.

Steve Jones

Listen to the podcast at Libsyn, Spotify, or iTunes.

Note, podcasts are only available for a limited time online.

Posted in Editorial | Tagged | 4 Comments