Re: young guy wanting (Postgres DBA) ammo

Yes..I concur that every business should retain a dedicated DBA with the
caveat that the DBA's expertise states a bit more than
'changed the DBA password'

M--
----- Original Message -----
Wrom: HDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJB
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] young guy wanting (Postgres DBA) ammo

> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 01:26:23AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > out there who don't get past that hurdle and just give up. It would
> > be interesting to troll the mysql lists for evidence of the downside
> > of their default ... which'd be along the line of "someone broke into
> > my completely insecure database and stole/destroyed all my data" ...
>
> Not "stole", surely? If they don't know they need a DBA, then they
> presumably also don't know that someone's been into the system and
> taken stuff.
>
> To respong to the original question, I'd also point out that sites
> that thought, "We can't afford a sysadmin," have usually found out
> the hard way that they were mistaken. Even for simple Windows
> networks of a few machines, you need someone to look after it.
>
> Refusing to hire a DBA for data you actually care about is like
> refusing to take your car to the mechanic at regular service
> intervals, because "there's nothing wrong with it." Supposing you
> don't need a DBA for MySQL or MS SQL Server or any other such system
> is a dangerous delusion.
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>