Joe - In our shop we do have a rather extensive homegrown SQL
application. This application requires more attention from a DBA's point
of view than a traditional System i application.

What is interesting in our case is that our System i DBA is also a DBA
on the Oracle/MS SQL Server platforms too.

Of course on those platforms they can easily separate System
Administration from DBA.

Our external auditors just need to understand the System i architecture
and how it differs from traditional system architecture. We just need to
keep telling them that!


-----Original Message-----

I may be wrong, Kenneth, but I usually hear this sort of question from
an auditor who isn't familiar with the System i platform. Typically
their background is in Windows or *nix systems (or even mainframes)
where database administration is in fact a full-time job. On the System
i platform, there is typically much less work involved along the lines
of tuning and performance monitoring, and the actual DB admin job is
more of a security and back role, and so really falls under system

Now, this isn't a blanket statement, and as more pure SQL packages are
ported to the box and/or companies write more SQL applications, the
amount of database administration may grow. If you use more SQL than
native I/O, then you may find yourself in that category.

But for the majority of today's System i shops, the DB admin tasks still
fit nicely within the scope of the system administration.


This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].