Kevin Hunter wrote:
>> "what do I need to able to do to be able to honestly say that 'I am a
>> Postgres DBA' on my resume"
Greg Smith wrote:
> Organizing things as above, this turns into a somewhat fuzzy question
> about how much of the grid one has to cover before achieving that goal.
> Consider this; who will be more effective as a PostgreSQL DBA:
...
> There's understanding the breadth of this field, and there's knowing
> some depth about each of the topic, and the exact mix of the two varies
> from person to person. There's so many aspects to this type of work
> that drawing a line and saying "if you know X, Y, and Z you can consider
> yourself a Postgres DBA" doesn't make a lot of sense. You mentioned
> training and certification. Part of the value of going through either
> of those is that you end up with some baseline idea of what someone who
> has gone through the class/test has been exposed to.
Rephrase the claim. Since "being a Postgres DBA" is not a binary state, you
should honestly say where you fall in the spectrum. Instead of "I'm a PG
DBA", one could say, "I have some experience as a PG DBA and I am comfortable
with the role." Variations might include, "I have a lot of DBA experience,
but somewhat more limited PG-specific knowledge", or, "I've been honing my PG
DBA skills, and I have a solid but basic competence", and the like.
Chances are you will be able to make such judgments with much more confidence
than claiming to be or not to be a DBA.
--
Lew
