Who's Afraid of Self-Managing Databases?

My comments below:

Who's Afraid of Self-Managing Databases?: "The major database vendors (Oracle, IBM, and Microsoft) have invested greatly over the past decade to improve the manageability of the relational database.

The goal is to increase the ratio of DBAs to databases supported, thereby lowering the total cost of ownership for a database.

The problem is that some DBAs and consultants that provide DBA services want you to believe nothing has changed.

They say that even though all of this built-in self-tuning functionality is in the database software, it is optional and not intended to replace standard DBA activities.

They will make statements like 'automation features are aimed at shops that do not have the manpower or expertise to manually perform the tasks.'

As an IT manager, you must see the absurdity in such statements."

A hot topic, sure. And he has a point. Smaller databases don't need much DBA involvement, hardly at all nowadays. And they don't get any hardly in companies I have been in.

But where does Charles acknowledge that the volume of data stored in databases is growing? By some measure as fast as Moore's law? and not linearally, but exponentially?

And the visibility for the value of business intelligence has moved from finance, to marketing, to operations, to.... the list goes on? Not to mention the security that will be involved in such initiatives.

And that access times to storage are not increasing as fast as volumes are?

There's more need for DBAs, albeit with a more focused skillset, today than ever. Luckily, any CIO is going to look right this article as he remembers the meeting last week on the latest RFID initiative, and how it was stressed that the volume of data it will produce borders on insanity, and redefines what was a "reasonable" size for a database a couple of years ago - just as that expectation has to get readjested every couple of years, and will continue to be.

Yes, that CIO will think you don't have clue, Mr. Garry.