As you might have gathered from my previous e-mail I'm not a big fan of
functional division as opposed to project division.
Since I was moved to a different building from the developers much of the
time I don't spend dealing with the new paperwork and bureaucracy I spend on
the phone. I can see t
On June 28, 2001 11:51 am, Miller, Jay wrote:
> Yep, I've dealt with incredibly incompetent consultants (Because of
> our new division of responsibilties, all programming must come from
> the development team. I
This brings up an interesting point - I've noticed that recently
division of respon
Okay, my situation doesn't seem so bad now. Thanks!
The rules are mitigated by a number of sensible managers here and there who
do their best to see that things hold together.
And I won't comment in a public forum as to whether something necessary has
occasionally been done while paperwork is s
Rama Malladi
com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Griping about
auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
root@fatcity.
com
06/25/2001
You mean you're not in on the conspiracy? You will be receiving a visit
very soon...
You know who had to train the non-DBA how to read the alert logs...
In the end it's not so bad, primarily because my immediate manager (started
as a good SQL server DBA and is now slowly going insane since he h
That's actually a good idea. We can control the world by taking over
all the data. We will be so powerful. :)
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/25/01 11:45AM >>>
A non-DBA? Is that because we stick together like the Mafia or
something?!
g
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 3:32 PM
14-1002
Rama Malladi
com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Griping about
auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
root@fatcity.
com
Kimberly;
Absolutely.
And I did not take ANY of your comments as Rude or Presumptuous. I am sorry
my comments in my note drove someone to think that of you.
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:22 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
This is the line I w
Rama Malladi
com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Griping about auditing (not
the Oracle Kind)
Full authority and no responcibility - looks like very much an HMO. I don't
think I would survive in this environment for so long. Maybe if I did not
have where to go and had small children to feed. This is exactly what I
posted. This is no win game and possible only if payd by the hour and payd
v
Different situations . different solutions. Its all subjective. What
will work at one location is like using a feather to stop an elephant at
another. rather useless.
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 1:31 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sorry but
This is the line I was commenting on...
"I personally think that you should wait with resizing any of your
production
data files until you get oracle errors saying that things can not extend."
I never once said that you should ignore the process put in place. What I
said is that waiting until
ively affects the bottom line gets their attention.
Michael Kline
ThinkSpark
Richmond, VA
804-744-1545
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Don
> Granaman
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:20 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of li
Title: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
My
point precisely. I'm not putting my neck on the line because someone won't allow
me to do my job. Let them be the one who takes the hit when the s**t hits the
fan.
Thanks
Chris, good point well made (better than my
Excuse me but you are a little presumptious and rude with that last mail. If
a process is put in place that requires a form to be signed and
authorisation to be given before action can be taken then I would be going
totally against the grain and would get into trouble for not adhering to the
compa
I can supply the commiseration! You have my sympathies. I just left my
last job (also at a major online brokerage) because of exactly the same sort
of nonsense. In the "good old days" things ran fairly smoothly, technical
people made technical decisions, and the job was great. Then we got very
to fix the
problem when it becomes an emergency
>From: "Bowes, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 20
D]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 13:05:46 -0800
>
>In a perfect world or even a sucky world, yes. But the nightmare scenerio
ovals from the
> Executive as long as each change is implemented according to the
> authorized procedure.However, changes to the administrative
> procedures require reauthorization by the Executive.
>
> David A. Barbour
> Oracle DBA, OCP
> AISD
> 512-414-1002
>
>
Title: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
Alex,
Touche` , I didn't think about the
managers CYA ability. Most don't get their jobs by being good, they
get there by knowing how to blame people and look good by
comparison... They were most definitely in a
Title: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
The way I read it was that they aren't letting it fail because they want to make a point. They are letting it fail because they were told they could not fix it. Then when it did fail, they made sure it was real inconvenient for
Title: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
I
suggest CYA as much as possible and escalate the issue and begin search
for another job. Also if you are an FTE - now is a good time to go on
vacation or become sick. Because if something breaks damagement knows much
better how to
Title: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
In a perfect world or even a sucky world, yes. But the nightmare scenerio that was laid out wouldn't allow proactivity on their part. The inconvenient time thing was due to the fact that the proactive items they wanted to to do
the way to get things done.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Griping about auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 12:00:58 -0800
>
>
>
>Kimberly
jitsu.com>cc:
Sent by: Subject: RE: Griping about
auditing (not the Oracle Kind)
LTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: cc:
Sorry but there are better ways.
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:00 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Well Kimberly, sometimes you have to do what you have to do to get a point
accross. Depending on the type of employer you have, sometimes you have to
take
Well Kimberly, sometimes you have to do what you have to do to get a point
accross. Depending on the type of employer you have, sometimes you have to
take drastic measures that you would not normally take.
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 12:16 PM
To: Multiple recipients of
I say that if you wait until you database has an error you really
aren't proving much except that you are not proactive in your job.
Which, in my book, makes you not a very good DBA. Dealing with a
dumb process is one thing (we have our fair share on this account)
but I take to much pride in my
Jay,
'you can't put that many changes through'
I love it! see, how it works! follow the dumb process they establish, and
it gets even dumber!eventually, it breaks and they see the folly of the
process.
it reminds me of almost every "M*A*S*H" episode I ever saw.
"Want me to arrest him too,
Wahey !!! The answer I was going to provide. We started calling the manager
up quite frequently at home to authorise changes - he eventually saw sense.
Not quite as bad as 2am in the morning but inconvenient enough for him to
put a stop to it.
Best of Luck.
-Original Message-
Sent: 25 J
Alex,
that was the result of an "inexperienced" DBA. an experienced DBA would
know that there is a load placed on the server during datafile addition
time. if you have a server with extra "oomf", then the users should not see
any difference.
it sounds like you had a very sensitive database that
Jay;
I have had to go thru the same thing a couple times on a previous job with
Auditors. Every time those kind of restrictions were placed on us it
brought things to a snails pace or, in some conditions, a complete halt.
Sooner or later they realized that it was unreasonable and lifted them.
Frankly, I can understand the concern about data (we're a brokerage and have
lots of customer account information). But having a non-technical person
approve adding a datafile? And then another non-technical person review
that the adding was done according to an approved form? Is it obvious tha
A non-DBA? Is that because we stick together like the Mafia or
something?!
g
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 3:32 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
We've been through an internal audit and I was just wondering if anyone
else
has to deal with the rather ludicro
Close, it's a brokerage.
But regarding flooding the SVP, one of my favorite Dilbert moments came
about a month after the new procedures were in place. They were getting
forms from multiple sources (me, the developers on our OLTP database and the
developers from our datawarehouse). All those were
They afraid you'll add items you're not license for
when installing software, and i'm still trying to figure out why if you resize
something a SVP needs to know, talk about micro-managing.
joe
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/25/01 10:31AM
>>>We've been through an internal audit and I was just wond
I agree with you, however in one of my previous contracts one guy decided to
add datafile to the database. He aadded a 2G file and database for several
minutes did only one thing - created datafile. Application servers were shut
down because they checked DB every 5 sec or something like that. Ther
Hi,
Been there recently
We had change management here breathing down our necks at one point. They
wanted everything documented and approved. I flooded them with change
request forms (even for changing a users password on the test database)
and within two days they wanted a meeting about what we
Jay,
You did not say what type of an employer you are currently at, so it is
tough to comment.
I have seen *very* strict controls put into place at various places of
employment. It sounds like you are at a gov't facility where audit and
control is serious business.
You have three choices:
1).
One of the reasons DBA's are paid well is that they have total control over
the production data. No matter what rules the auditors put in place, a DBA
could manipulate the data if they wanted to. The company should trust you
to do your job and not put up read blocks that prevent you from maintai
41 matches
Mail list logo
