One of the hardest things to manage as a DBA is all the different sources we receive requests through. We get walk-ups, emails, calls, tickets, rumors, pigeons, and sometimes even smoke signals. And while it’s easy for the boss to say ‘no ticket, no problem’, as a DBA in the trenches you can’t exactly be a dick to your users. You have to take the request in whatever form it manifests itself. Sure, you can try to push everyone to a ticketing system, but it’s just not worth it in the long run. Too many times the request is just something small like can I have access to this table or can I get a backup real quick so I can push this new code. Using a ticketing system just isn’t always practical or even conducive to good relations.

So what can you do then? I mean, you can’t exactly just have people shouting requests at you from down the hall assuming you heard them. What I tend to do is push everyone to email. After all, I get email on my hip and it’s easy enough to not get in the way of even the simplest requests. When I’m in a shop that insists on having tickets for everything, I’ll take requests through email, and just create the ticket myself. And once I get all these requests coming in, I keep them organized in a master list of some kind. I used to use Excel which has its advantages with sorting, etc. Currently, I use OneNote and I’m liking it just fine. In the past I’ve also written small web apps to manage my task list too.

The point is though it really doesn’t matter what you use. Use whatever is easiest for you and that won’t hold you back. Just make sure that whatever you use, you use all the time. If you want to manage tasks in Outlook, then do so. Like I said though, I like OneNote these days. That’s mainly because it’s easy to copy emails from Outlook. That makes it really easy to reply once the task is done, and it gives me a record of exactly what was requested.

I was watching this guy in the bathroom the other day (no, not like that… be nice!). And something struck me as a bit useless. So what this guy did was he had one of those large PDA phones and he didn’t have any where to put it, so he laid it on top of the urinal while he was doing his business. When he was done, he took it out and went to the sink and washed his hands. Then he took his phone and left. Since he actually laid his phone on the urinal and didn’t wash it, I was wondering why he bothered washing his hands at all. Doesn’t he know that unless he actually pees directly on his hands that they’re not in any more danger than his phone is, and it’s actually highly likely that his phone has whatever his hands do? And where do you think all that yuckiness will go next time he uses his phone?

I saw this episode of MythBusters where they tested this theory with toothbrushes. They had a control brush under glass down the hall, and they had a couple more sitting in the bathroom, etc. At the end, what they found was that there was just as much fecal matter on the brush under glass down the hall as there was on the one in the bathroom itself. Pretty gross, huh? The point is that there’s a lot of conjecture that goes on when it comes to bathroom habits and the like. The MythBusters however, pulled hard numbers and proved that your toothbrush is going to get nasty stuff on it regardless.

In DBs we deal with numbers, and not conjecture and not feelings. Numbers don’t lie. So the next time you step into a meeting, or go to your boss and ask for a change to the DB for whatever reason, perhaps it would be best if you pulled some numbers so you have something solid to back you up. Otherwise, despite all your trouble, you might just end up with piss on your face.

OK, I’ve been promising this for a long time now, but I finally got the RSS ready for IT Bookworm. So you guys go on and subscribe and I’ll update it with book and video reviews as well as press releases for new books and videos. I may even put some training discounts up there if they come my way.

I’m actually double posting this here and at Underground just to help get the word out.

OK, from time to time this topic comes up so I thought I’d publish this info in the hopes that someone will find it useful.

The problem is with getting non-admins the ability to admin jobs in SQL2K. It’s widely known that only SAs can do this, but there’s a special DB role in msdb that lets you do this w/o having to be an admin. Rather than give you a big explanation, here’s the code so you can test it yourself. This will let anyone in this group admin SQL jobs just like they were SA.

use msdb
exec master..sp_addlogin ‘testme’, ‘testme’, ‘msdb’
exec msdb..sp_adduser ‘testme’, ‘testme’, ‘TargetServersRole’
grant execute on sp_add_job to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_add_jobstep to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_update_job to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_add_jobserver to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_add_jobschedule to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_delete_jobschedule to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_delete_job to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_start_job to TargetServersRole
grant execute on sp_stop_job to TargetServersRole

I hope this helps somebody. If you want to give the ability to admin only specific jobs though, you’ll still have to use one of the intermediate steps you did before, or make the user the owner of the job.
Too bad groups can’t own jobs.

Today on SSWUG, Steven talked about the new DB Architect cert from MS. I have no problem with what he said, and in fact, I even agree with most of it. However, it’s really going to be hard to make any of us care about it when pretty much every company out there acts like DB work is so easy that pretty much anyone can do it. Companies go through DBAs like candy with this laissez-faire attitude that any DBA is as good as the next.

It’s really getting kinda sickening. Somehow they think that their IT staff is so replacable that they can do anything to us they want and they can just go get another one. Well, I don’t know about any of you guys, but I don’t remember seeing any DBAs standing on the work wall at 7-11.

I really think that most of the problem is that companies still don’t see the real benefit to putting the time in on their apps before they hit production. Most companies still just rush things together and test their apps under fire. They have the coders write the DB schema, and architect the entire solution. Well, I’m sure that reading a couple .Net books qualifies you as an expert in networks, storage platforms, DB schemas, indexing, etc. And until companies start to realize that all of these things can’t be done by one person, and that they’re all a lot harder than they sound, we won’t get any real respect. See, once they make that leap, and start to finally see that these things not only matter, but they’d actually start listening to their DBAs and actually treat them like their valued members of the company with something very important to contribute.

Now, nothing has really spawned this post except me thinking about how trivial this new cert is going to be. If companies don’t even see the need for this stuff, then our precious new cert certainly isn’t going to mean anything to them. So basically, we’re getting certs to impress other geeks at conferences. It’s almost like we’re displaying our Klingon ranks for each other to see.

And I know what you’re thinking… I’m complete wrong and companies are really into architecting real solutions. Well, if that were true, then we wouldn’t need to be compliance audits for basic IT processes. Hell, we have to fight companies for even an extra week to benchmark a new app, much less for the money to buy the benchmark software. It’s pathetic. I realize that it’s a pain in the ass to have to hold off on your deployment for something as worthless as benchmarking, but you’re just gonna have to start sucking it up.

Anyway, that’s all I’ve got.

We’re currently setting up Informatica and we got some scripts from them to create the DB. There were 3 scripts in all. The first script went ok. The 2nd had some problems, but it was small enough that I was able to just fix them and get past it in fairly short order.

The 3rd however was just pathetic. Not only was it huge, but it was plagued with dozens upon dozens of errors. The header of the scripts says that they were written and tested in SQL Server 7.0. WHAT? You haven’t updated your scripts in 10yrs? Not only that, but with the errors I was getting, there’s just NO WAY they ever even ran on SQL 7. It’s mathematically impossible. Here are the problems I remember… there may have been more.

1. Deleting tables before they’re even created. They should have put an IF clause in there.
2. They were deleting PK tables before their FK tables were deleted. Excuse me guys… have you ever heard of referential integrity?
3. They were creating relationships with data types that didn’t match, so I got TONS of errors that the 2 column in the relationship had different data types. I don’t even see how this is possible.

Frankly, I’m not only disappointed, but somewhat shocked at the lack of skill a company like Informatica displays here. My mother could write better SQL than this. There’s no way this code ever ran. I’ve even got a VMWare image with SQL 7 on it, and I ran it in there, and it bombed too, so don’t give me any of that wrong version of SQL crap.

It really does make you wonder though. How many people are actually using Informatica? Because for them to send a customer such pathetic code, it clearly hasn’t been tested… EVER.

And this isn’t the only bad code I’ve ever received from a vendor. It seems like somehow none of them can write SQL that runs worth a damn. It really doesn’t seem that hard does it? Because I’ve written hundreds of scripts, and when I’m done, I run it. It either runs well or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t run without errors, I fix it. Go figure! And some mistakes are understandable, but like I said, there’s no way that dropping a table before it’s created has ever run without an error. The code was simply never run against a DB.

I can probably tell you what happened though. The developer already had the schema in his DB and he was getting errors when he needed to create the tables so he added drop statements. I guess it never crossed his mind that someone might be installing for the first time. The other errors however… there’s just no way he ever got the rest of that script to run.

I’m sitting at home really sick today, so do me a favor and just assume I would’ve said something really inspiring and groundbreaking about backup or benchmarking.

Hopefully I’ll be back online tomorrow.

I was talking to a vendor the other day, and he was saying that he was trying to do a 3rd party solution that would allow you to mirror a single DB to several servers at once. I’ve officially coined the phrase MultiCast Mirroring. I think this is the next logical step in the mirroring process, and while it wouldn’t be practical to use it with safety on, you could use it to keep several types of systems more or less in synch. Of course, I would expect that at least one of the mirroring sessions would have safety on, but not all.

I know what you’re all thinking… if you need to do something like that then why not just use replication? Well, that’s actually a significant question and as we’ve all seen, repl and mirroring aren’t the same thing at all. They’re different approaches to similar problems, but they do have major differences. I’m not going to go into all the tired arguements right now, but most of us know what they are. Let me just say that repl adds a complication that doesn’t need to be there.

One interesting thing is that I’m going over the architecture of what would make this possible, and under the covers, it would need to look a lot like repl. To avoid any reading conflicts, etc with the primary log, you’d prob end up shipping the single log to like a log distribution server where any server that wants to attach itself to it as a mirror can do so. So now we’re looking at kind of a publisher/subscriber type of method. It’s still easier to keep up with than repl. though.

Anyway, this is all just my rambling, but it would still be interesting to see something like that.

You know, sometimes it just really pays to be overly paranoid, esp about backups. Here’s the deal…

I’ve got my home web server and database. I had an array controller start acting up on me about a month ago and I knew I was gonna have to replace it. So I started the process of making sure I had good backups of all my data in case the controller went out before I had a chance to fix it. I copied my DBs and websites to a different partition on the same box. I also backed them up to my NAS. I also copied them over to a different server. And just to be sure, in case the backup was corrupt (which is a real possibility with Windows backup), I copied the raw files to the NAS as well. OK, so I’ve got all of this paranoia going on here, but this is very important data to me and I just can’t afford to lose it.

So I got my array back up and everything up and running again. No problems. Now, this weekend, I lost a drive on that array. And of course, I’m using Raid-0. Why? Well, because disk is expensive and this is my home system, and sometimes it’s hard to justify the extra cost of making things redundant. Well, I’ve been running backups to the NAS pretty much every day, so I knew I was protected. Unfortunately, I found that my NAS had lost a disk too… and you guessed it… Raid-0 as well. OK, I could ordinarily go to that other server that I copied it to from the previous outage, but I’m in the middle of rebuilding that server for my new Exchange server. So that data’s no longer there… great.

Now it looks like I’ve lost all my data. I can’t get the array back, and I’ve lost something like 12yrs of data. It’s a complete disaster. Well, last night after talking to one of those disk recovery folks, I was about to pack up my array and send it to them for the $3,000 data retrieval process, when I looked at the other partition on my server and there it was… the data I had copied over from the previous meltdown! I couldn’t believe it. Furtunately, my data doesn’t change often enough to really worry about a couple weeks going by between backups, so I haven’t lost anything at all.

Let me just say that when it comes to backups, it pays to be extremely paranoid. If your data’s that important, act like it. I thought that my NAS and other server would be good enough, but they clearly weren’t. So always plan for a multiple failure if it’s at all possible. You could have electrical problems that knock out more than one server, you could have a flood or other natural disaster, etc. I’m serious here. If the data you’re protecting is that important, treat it as such. In fact, treat it like a newborn baby. Protect it and never let anything happen to it.

I’ll definitely be revamping my backup strategy at home so nothing like this ever happens again. I guess the first part of that is to stop being so cheap and get off Raid-0. I just can’t afford that anymore. So you guys learn from my almost misfortune and take a good hard look at your backups with a paranoid eye. Develop impossible scenarios and see if your strategy can overcome them.

Good Luck!