Re: Is my MySQL Gaining ? - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Bret Busby |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Is my MySQL Gaining ? |
Date | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.44.0312311229230.24598-100000@BBRH73.busby.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Is my MySQL Gaining ? ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
List | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > Have you undertaken the MySQL certifications? If not, how can you say > > that they are not worthwhile? > > > > I think what a lot of people forget is that certifications are meant > to be a baseline. They are meant to allow an employer to say, > "Hey this person at least has some idea of what they are doing." > > Also, specifically pertaining to many people on this list, certification > is pointless. For them. There is a point in your professional life > where a certification becomes "So What" and your resume should be > enough. > > Frankly, if someone like Tom Lane came to me and said, "Hey I have 20 > years experience with databases and I am a PostgreSQL core developer." > My response would not be, "Do you have any certs?" and I would > question the sanity, validity, and intelligence of any person who did. > He has the experience and resume to back up his worth. > > I think that we realise that someone like Tom Lane, or Bruce Momjian, would not need to worry about having to have things like certification, but, it must be remembered that not everyone is a recognised PostgreSQL guru, and, people are at different levels, regarding something like PostgreSQL. And, certification is subjective. I had not heard of some things, like Bernoulli's theorem, until I attended university, and my wife's younger brother has covered that with one of his primary school classes that he teaches. And, whereas in 1978, to become a laboratory assistant in New Zealand, required a Bachelor of Science, and, to become a laboratory assistant in Western Australia, required having passed a universities entrance exam at secondary school, or a technical college certificate, which was at about the same level as the universities entrance examination. That was due to different countries having different levels of difficulty in obtaining employment, and thus, employers being able to be selective to different degrees (no pun intended), due to differing employment market pressures. But, in both countries, having passed a universities entrance examination, meant the same, or similar, level of achievement had been completed, and, having completed a university degree, had the similar meaning. And, as you said in your first paragraph above, certifications are meant to be a baseline, and they give an employer good reason to believe that a person has some idea of what the person is doing, at the level of the certification. I know that people who have been in computing, from before computing degrees were dreamed of, probably do not need formal qualifications. However, as with software engineering, and computer science, degree courses and certifications, apart from completion being able to show that a person has achieved a particular standard, there is also the important aspect, that a person has been trained to do something (relatively) properly, in most cases. So, whilst people on the list, in discussing prospective content of trating courses and/or tutorials, have said that issues like normalisation, are too generic, and have no place in PostgreSQL training, if the formal, standardised, structured, training and certification that I have suggested, is implemented, and, it includes generic database stuff, like normalisation, then a prospective employer or hirer of a contractor, who may know something about databases, may be given the knowledge that a prospective employee, is unlikely to use postgreSQL to generate what is not much more than a flat-file database, when a database should be normalised. It goes to the issue of having an idea of the value of formal training and certification. In that, I mean a prospective employer, having an idea of the value. A good example of the need for formalised, standardised, structured, training and certification, is a man that I met several year sgo, who was the head of the maths and computing teaching department at one of the universities, here in Western Australia. He told me that he didn't believe in documenting programs. His area was computing, and he taught computer programming. Given the complexity of some computer programming languages, and the possible obscurity of some code, I hope that I never encounter the code of such a programmer. My wife has encountered undocumented databases, that she has had to modify, or, to migrate to another DBMS. Much time can be wasted through bad practices. To quote from a book that we have just acquired; "Troubleshooting SQL", by Forrest Houlette, 2001, (the book, whilst being SQL-Server-oriented, including material relating to SQL in general), in the chapter "Using Best Practices"; "Recently I had to perform maintenance on a program that was written by a guy who believed that you should have to struggle with code to understand it. He used one-character variable names, and as a consequence the cost of having a consultant come in to do maintenance on this program was considerably higher than it should have been. Let's do the math to illustrate the point. Average billable hours went to this company at $55 per hour. It took eight hours just to figure out what this piece of code did. That time cost the company $440. Keep in mind, all that happened during that time was that the consultant read the code and traced its thread of execution. It took two hours to make and test the change, time billable for a total of $110. If we assume that self-documenting code could have reduced the research time by half, the cost for making a minor change to the program drops by $220. The point is that self-documenting code reduces the cost of owning a software system considerably. Variable names figure into that cost reduction as a significant factor." So, good practices save time and money. Formalised, structured, standardised, training and certification, can increase the use of good practices, and, the confidence that good practices will be used, and, therefore, the confidence of efficiency. It is like the use of the CMMI assessment for software developers, be they small businesses, or corporations. I attended a .NET Community Of Practice seminar, a few months ago, and encountered a concept of which I was not previously aware, and I am not sure of the name for it; where a form allows SQL code instead of values, to be input into an input field in a form, allowing hacking into the database. The seminar warned against allowing such security breaches, and, mentioned various options and best ways of performing tasks. And, no, I am not of the .NET world, but, I learnt from the seminar. The inclusion of such issues, in formalised training, would also increase public confidence in software, which I understand to be one of the issues in software engineering. Formalised, standardised, structured, training and certification, can increase a prospective employer's confidence, both that an employee is more than just a hack-programmer, and, that the employee, apart from having a reasonable idea of what the employee is doing, does what the employee is supposed to do, properly, and most efficiently, producing the most reliable and efficient result. > > If you cannot see the advantages of formalised, structured, standardised > > training and certification, then I assume that you have no > > qualifications, and did not graduate from secondary school? > > Well this was just plain snobbish. There are benefits to secondary > school but they do not pertain to each individual and it has been > proven time and time again that secondary school (college) can actually > hamper the minds, creativity and capabilities for a person to grown. > Bill Gates, and Michael Dell come to mind. > > The above of course is not par for the course for everyone. Some people > need to be taught, some can teach themselves, some can only teach > themselves within one arena of talent, some are complete morons... it > depends on the individual. > It, surely, is all about the basic principle of public education; ensuring that people are educated to the same level(s). That is the great advantage - being educated to prescribed levels, nd, in knowing that a person has been educated to a particular leve, and therefore, attributing a particular level of skills to the person. > > > Such things > > are generally implemented at secondary school and further education, and > > Informix and Oracle and Microsoft have such things, from my > > understanding. > > As someone who has passed the MS exams, you don't need them, they are > joke. The A+ was more difficult than the memorize the side bars and > select letter "C" testing that Microsoft offers. > > Did you complete the MCAD and MCSD courses? -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .............. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 ....................................................
pgsql-general by date: