Re: AW: What would you do without RPG?

On 7/31/2014 1:28 AM, Birgitta Hauser wrote:

Why are there so many Oracle and MS SQL Server DBA's, and so few IBM I

DBA's?

Because there is not enough work to do for an IBM i DBA, database and
operating system do a lot for them.
For example:
Who ever reorganized indexes (or logical files) on the i?
Who ever had to care about table spaces and buffers on the i?
Who ever calculated the blocking size based on the row length on the i?
Who ever updated statistics on the i?
Etc.

RLA performance issues are almost always solved programmatically. Maybe
a new work file is created or the programs are run in a different
sequence or an upstream program accumulates totals. SQL performance
issues are almost never solved programmatically. The DBA creates the
appropriate indexes and the optimiser does a better job.

The statements in this thread are necessarily very general; the
'typical' IBM i group doesn't have a full time DBA, instead the senior
programmer typically does those tasks as part of her work. Likewise,
the typical IBM i group has much more RLA in the code base than FETCH,
INSERT and UPDATE. This means that in general, performance issues are
resolved by the programmers, not by SQL indexes. Because of that
balance, right now, there is not enough work for a full time DBA in the
typical IBM i development group.

There might be someone who cares about the performance, i.e. someone who
surveys the queries and creates the right indexe.
But even with a well-designed SQL database it's rarely a full-time job.

As a general statement, I agree with this at this moment in time. But
times are changing, and the typical IBM i group is changing too. Look
at the questions we see on this list. Every month there are more
questions about SQL performance and fewer questions about RLA
performance. There are more questions about stored procedures, UDFs,
UDTFs and the like. As the typical IBM i programmer gets more familiar
with all of the power of DB2, she will start using more and more of it.
And as that happens, there will be a greater need for a full time DBA
who can help the developers organise and reuse tables, procedures and
functions.

Oh, and keep performance up too.
--buck

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Birgitta Hauser

"Shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll land among the stars." (Les
Brown)
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." (Derek Bok)
"What is worse than training your staff and losing them? Not training them
and keeping them!"

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: RPG400-L [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Mark
Murphy/STAR BASE Consulting Inc.
Gesendet: Wednesday, 30.7 2014 19:24
An: RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)
Betreff: Re: What would you do without RPG?

While that sounds reasonable, if true, it begs the question: Why are there
so many Oracle and MS SQL Server DBA's, and so few IBM I DBA's? It's not
that Oracle and SQL Server do more work, and I doubt that IT directors in
those shops are just looking for people to give money to.

Mark Murphy
STAR BASE Consulting, Inc.
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----Steve Richter <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
To: "RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)"
<rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Steve Richter <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 07/19/2014 05:59PM
Subject: Re: What would you do without RPG?

On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Birgitta Hauser <Hauser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

SAP on i:
Sometimes ago in an SQL Workshop someone told me they formerly worked
with SAP on a pSeries and an Oracle database.
He also told me as long as they worked with the ORACLE database there
were everyday 3 DBAs who did nothing else than balance indexes and
adjust buffers etc.

that has to be make work, no? There must be code an ORACLE admin can run
that automates whatever it is that has to be done to keep the database
functioning.

-Steve