SQL Server DBA: The worst days

In a recent blog post Steve Jones posed the question; what was the worst day in your career? Great idea by the way.

A couple of experiences that occurred early on in my DBA career sprung to mind. There was the rather nasty corruption of a critical but not highly available application database that happened mid-afternoon which led to a very manual and overnight full restore (legacy system means very legacy hardware).  

The subsequent post-restore checks were also quite lengthy meaning the entire recovery process concluded at around 5.30AM the next morning, which actually wasn't that far from my estimated ETA of a working system. Operationally the effects weren't too bad; transactions were captured using a separate system and then migrated into the restored database when it came back online. I'll never forget the post incident discussion either; no finger pointing, no blame whatsoever just a well done to all for having a successful recovery operation and a genuine interest in how we could further minimise any impact in future. 

Then there was the time the execution of an application patch with a slight (and undiscovered until then) code imperfection brought down an entire production server, that just happened to be attempting to process some rather critical financial workloads from various systems at the same time. In truth it was a completely freak event that had happened on a combination of very old systems that were considered flaky at best.

The systems were brought online quickly enough but tying together the results of the various processes that may or may not have worked took hours and hours of querying with lots of manual updates. It might sound terrible, but because of the coordinated effort between different teams and individuals it had actually taken a fraction of the time that it could have done and not only that, data was confirmed to be 100% accurate.  

Want another corruption tale? Why not. How about the time a system database on a 2005 instance went all corrupt rendering the instance completely useless? Of course it never happens to a system that nobody cares about, no, yet another critical system. The operational teams went to plan B very quickly but even better, a solution that avoided large restores was implemented quickly so the downtime, although handled well, was still significantly reduced.

Looking back there's plenty more, I think it's fair to say that disaster is a real occupational hazard for database professionals. And yet despite being labelled "worst days" I actually look back on them with a large degree of genuine fondness. 

You see disasters are always going to happen when databases are involved, it's a fact and how we deal with them at the time is equally as important as how we learn from these events. In each of these examples a recovery plan was in existence for both technical and operational viewpoints, as well as that everyone involved knew what was happening, what to do and critically not to add any additional pain to the situation but to arrive at the solution as quickly as possible.

Learning from these events meant asking the right questions and not taking a viewpoint of blame. How can we prevent this, how can we make a recovery process more robust and what can we implement technically and operationally to improve our response times and also critically, when can we schedule the next Disaster Recovery test? 

Worst days? In one sense most definitely yes. Nobody wants to be in the middle of a technical disaster that's going to take hours to resolve but a solid recovery plan, collaborative effort to a solution and an open forum to analyse and learn from the event makes these memories much less painful!

Building a DevOps culture

In my last post I described some of the reasons why organisations fail to implement a successful DevOps methodology. Often there is a misunderstanding of what actually DevOps is but often existing working cultures can be the thing hindering progress.

From webopedia: "DevOps (development and operations) is an enterprise software development phrase used to mean a type of agile relationship between development and IT operations."

Being a consultant I often work in the "space" between different technical roles which gives me an ideal view of how well companies are utilising DevOps practices or sometimes, where they're going wrong.

For me the most crucial part is building strong collaborative working relationships between teams. In the database world this isn't just between developers and DBA's but also any team who in some way interacts with SQL Server. This includes support teams, testers, release and change teams, architects and technical management.

How we seek to build these relationships is pivotal. As I mentioned in the last post, forced collaboration is a common approach that ends up being counter productive. Organisations in their rush to build a DevOps culture can be too rigid in how they look to develop increased inter-team working, often over-formalising and creating very process driven activities. 

Instead organisations should look to encourage rather than dictate and I've seen many successful ways that this achieved, often in a management hands-off style that lets technical teams freely integrate and discuss innovative ways of doing things in much more open forums. When consulting with database professionals we explore common pain points that are shared between teams and how solutions to which are in some way, arrived at by leveraging one another's expertise. 

I say in some way because often the the issue isn't strictly technical but comes down to process instead. Release and change management are great examples of this; developers naturally want to make more and more frequent changes to systems which is against the better nature of traditional DBA's. 

Understanding each others objectives is the first stage of developing a collaborative effort to build upon existing processes (not work around them) to help each other achieve common aims. The word I never use is compromise and it should never feel like that. All involved should feel like they are building solutions together and not feel like that are to required to relinquish something to get there.

This is a common side effect where the approach to DevOps is unbalanced where teams are becoming involved at different stages. Instead organisations must involve all parties as early as possible and avoid maintaining those traditional silos. 

Increased cross functional teams means that teams work much faster together and this effects both development and problem management. One of the obstacles for moving to a platform of more frequent deployment is the risk of introducing much more failure to production systems. Done correctly, a DevOps methodology negates this by increasing the stability of systems and reducing the complexity of releases to environments which in turn makes faults much easier to not just to recognise but also rapidly back out from. 

It sounds like a case of everyone wins and typically I would honestly agree with that statement. A DevOps methodology has benefits for both teams and businesses alike; better employee engagement, much more personal development opportunities, increased productivity, more stable environments, more frequent enhancements and improved response times to defects.   

Issues that are preventing a DevOps methodology from being implemented can be often be resolved from a cultural perspective. A key starting point for organisations is to encourage collaborative relationships early on and for teams/individuals to seize the initiative and start talking about common pain points, desired solutions and building shared knowledge.

Reasons why DevOps implementations fail.

Over the last few years we have seen a monumental rise in the number of organisations adopting a DevOps working culture. This trend shows no signs of slowing down whatsoever and whilst many are now realising the benefits of these working practices many are also struggling with the adoption and in some cases it's either stopped completely or not even started.

There's a number of reasons of why this happens and I've seen some common causes, which is actually a good thing because we can recognise where these are occurring or even prevent them before they start to become a problem.

No clear direction.

It's very difficult to drive to a destination if you don't know where you're actually going (trust me on this, I've tried it). This is obviously very reasonable advice however many DevOps projects fail because of a lack of direction. It's actually a common issue with many buzzing trends, particularly in IT where organisations rush into a technology stack or movement just for the sake of doing it. Inevitably this often always leads to failure.

Organisations need to fully understand what a DevOps culture is, its objectives and its close relationships with their existing business processes and frameworks. A common misconception is people often viewing DevOps as a direct replacement for ITIL when in actual fact it's more of a cultural change built on top of ITIL principles. By fully understanding DevOps the benefits of adoption become much more viable and ultimately the path to it's success becomes much simpler.     

Adopting a silo approach to DevOps.

I often see individual teams being very successful in implementing components of DevOps practices only for other teams being behind in terms of adoption and/or understanding. The classic case is the Developer and DBA; the developer is pushing for much more frequent releases (a realised benefit of DevOps) but then the DBA, who perhaps isn't on board, is then trying their best to slow down all of these changes to their production databases. In the words of Bon Jovi, "we're half way there".

This lack of cohesion or a shared direction can result in a significant bottleneck and the DevOps practices start to creak a little. Then other unintended side effects start to creep in, such as blame and finger pointing (some of the things that a healthy DevOps culture seeks to eliminate) and then it can all start to fall apart. 

DevOps for databases is one particular area that is so heavily reliant on lots of people in different roles working together in a collaborative manner. An organisation must identify this and start to encourage teams to engage and build with each other in the early phases of a DevOps implementation, but organisations also have to be very careful in how they seek to develop this collaborative culture...

Forced collaboration.

I believe collaboration underpins the entire DevOps methodology so it makes perfect sense for organisations to work towards developing much closer working relationships between teams however organisations can also over-formalise things, even making the activity seem very process-driven which often leads to much less buy in from individuals, even entire teams.

This causes obvious problems, not least the silo approach mentioned in the previous point, so organisations have to find the balance on being almost relaxed in how they let relationships build and at the same time provide a certain degree of steer. This isn't as easy as it sounds and it is certainly reliant on strong leadership. In my experience successful implementations have been led by those that enable positive change rather than those who try to dictate it.

Rushing into new tools.

New tools are awesome, fact and in a DevOps ecosystem there are so many to pick and choose from that each bring new ways of doing things and [hopefully] improving productivity. The advantages are great, without a doubt but often tools can be implemented way too early without a focus on the underlying processes. This can significantly reduce the effectiveness of what a particular toolset/platform is trying to achieve; a release management tool for example won't improve a change/release process if the process is fundamentally flawed.

The most successful DevOps implementations focus on people and process first, leveraging the strengths and principles of existing frameworks and building strong collaborative working practices. New tools are going to be an important factor of a system designed with DevOps principles in mind but they need to be leveraged correctly and for the right reasons.


These are some of the common pitfalls that I've seen occur during DevOps implementations, many of which are deeply rooted in the working culture, not the technologies. There is undoubtedly so much to gain by adopting the principles and often it requires organisations to step back and observe their working practices first and spend time exploring the benefits of working with DevOps.

In my next post I'll cover how to address some of these issues and offer some insights into the benefits of building collaborative relationships between data professionals.

The DBA and the Data Platform

I've been consulting now for well over a year, it's been a fantastic experience so far; I've had the pleasure of meeting and working with some truly incredible people and it's also been amazing to be helping organisations get the most from their SQL Server platforms.

The last 12 months have been extremely interesting considering the current technical shift towards a seemingly endless list of new platforms and capabilities. For many organisations this shift has fundamentally changed how they do things (or going to do things) and many are going through their own journey of digital transformation understanding these new technologies and how to leverage them to improve their existing processes.

Right at the centre is data, nowadays considered to be a companies greatest asset, so how we use data or to be more exact how we extract more value from it is a frequent aim of these transformation projects. As a result the data professional roles within an organisation have changed too and many teams and individuals are having to broaden their technical skill set to design, deliver and support these new capabilities.

There is no truer example of this than the role of DBA but yet the question still remains on which direction(s) they should be focusing their future on? By that I mean development; which skills should they be learning, what certification, what products, platforms etc? It's easy to see why it's confusing; there are lots and lots of new technologies available to us but that also means there is no consistent path for administrators to set out on. 

It was easier in the not so distant past; the DBA role tended to come in two distinct flavours; development or operational, but now the line between the two has became far less apparent and in many cases non-existent. The DBA role has without question become much more rounded containing core elements from both "sides" but it goes beyond that. Modern approaches to database administration have reduced the footprint of the operational side of the role so a more DevOps orientated DBA is an essential part of the roadmap, for organisations and individuals alike.

This shared roadmap is actually an integral component of an evolving data platform. I've worked with many different organisations at different stages of development but a key component in each has always been a collaborative working practice between data professionals and I'd say the success of a platform depends on it. Over the past year I've worked alongside many different teams; architects, DBA's, developers, release analysts, change and testing specialists, when working together they all have a great influence of the effectiveness of a data solution. 

Whilst it's fair to say organisations should be encouraging this type of working practice it is very much dependent on individuals to pursue and implement it. For DBA's this means engaging with other teams much more frequently, understanding their skills and processes but also adding their own expertise and skill set to produce a much more co-operative function. 

It might not fully answer this common question of what next for DBA's, there's a lot of factors involved, not least your personal career aspirations but it does show how when looking for your next phase of self development the paths that you need to take could be very close to your current role. 

Your skills as a DBA will always be of paramount importance towards availability, security and performance, but by widening your technical scope by working much more closely with those around you not only improves you as an data professional but also the overall effectiveness your data platform. The starting point is to seek out these opportunities; start building relationships, start knowledge sharing and developing new ideas and different ways of working. 

In many ways the data platform is a reflection of the people tasked with shaping it. If we choose not to broaden ourselves, learn new ideas then at some point we come to a standstill, especially in this rapidly evolving technical landscape. If that happens a data platform stops growing, not in terms of data quantity but most certainly in terms of both capability and perhaps most critical of all, value. 

This puts a big emphasis on self-development but we've always had that, it's nothing new. The key is to seek out those opportunities, start close and work with teams that you will probably already have a working relationship with. As these relationships grow so does the collaborative skill set and as a result business processes improve and technical solutions get faster and more productive.

This also cuts down reactive measures, less time fire fighting means more time delivering enhancements and of course, more learning. Any learning process shouldn't have a cut off point, the more we broaden our horizons the more the effective we become and in turn, our products, our services and our platforms keep on evolving.

This is the true nature of a technical platform and we as data professionals play such an important part not just in the support or development of them but towards shaping their growth, effectiveness and their value. Perhaps the key to all of this is realising the value of our own development alongside it.   

Microsoft Visual Studio Dev Essentials

The last article that I posted was about my thoughts on the future of the DBA role and the direction that it and many others are going. If you haven't read it then please give it a read as it's been really interesting to read other peoples views and opinions on this topic and of course, huge thank you to anyone that has taken the time to do so already.

The TL/DR version of the post is that whilst job roles will be changing to keep with all of the technical advancements going on around us this isn't necessarily something to be worried about and it's actually quite an exciting time for us with lots of new these avenues to explore.

That's all fine but how do we go about gaining these new skills and will it be cost-effective to do so? Keeping our skills up to date has been of paramount importance to IT professionals and traditionally it's been down to the individual to shell out for courses and training material just to stay constant. Now there has been a bit of shift in regards to training and thankfully it has swung very much in the favour of those seeking to learn the technologies that are now becomign more common place.. 

Behind this shift are the very same organisations advancing and pushing their platforms into the commercial spaces. The bottom line is that as well as offering these technical solutions they also need people to be able to both use and support them. The more people that can do that the more adoption rates increase and with pay-as-you-use services such as the cloud this is vital.

In a nutshell, this means that they're giving us lots of training, mainly for free!

I don't want to sound like a TV/radio advert and say things like "THIS OFFER WON'T BE HERE FOREVER" but there is a little bit of truth to this. Whilst there are skills shortages in areas such as the cloud platforms these really won't last forever, particularity with adoption rates on a such a steep upward curve. Whilst I'm sure any free training options won't disappear, it does make a lot of sense to get on board now.

One option that I would certainly recommend you go look at is Microsoft Visual Studio Dev Essentials. Although the same suggests is very development focused it's definitely been designed and put together for anyone working in Microsoft's Data Platform. 

There's a bunch of goodies to download such as Visual Studio (surprise, surprise!), Developer Editions of Microsoft R and SQL Server, plans for Office Online and Power BI and crucially a trial subscription for Microsoft Azure.

Then there's the training options:

Now the image is a little blurry (maybe there's some copy and paste courses for me?!) but this is what you get:

3 months of online training with Opsgility (Microsoft Azure training),

3 months of full access to Pluralsight (um, everything!) ,

2 month subscription to Linux Academy (makes sense with SQL 2017 etc),

3 month subscription to WintellectNOW (for developers) and the various courses offered by Microsoft's Virtual Academy.

That is a lot of free training material and when you factor in all the resource available already out there like tutorials, labs and of course the community contributed materials, all in all it makes for one superb learning platform.

Choice is great but I would also recommend pausing for just a second before you hit the activate button on the training modules! Before you do make sure you have a good look at what courses are on offer, what interests you and start to formulate a plan for your learning. It doesn't have to be a strict timetable but being smart upfront will avoid any waste, after all, if you activate each training option at once and you are already pushed for time then some bits will be missed, it's bound to happen (and that would be a shame).

It is worth mentioning for those wondering if it's similar to an MSDN subscription then yes, it's very similar to a cut down version, last time I looked MSDN offers some of the same but for double the subscription period so if you want a paid option, or your organisation will pay for one then it might be worth going down that route.

It's a good time for many reasons; SQL Server 2017 now has a generally availability date of the 2nd of October and with it's native support for Linux, languages like R and Python then as always training is going to be really important and right now there is a lot of material out there for us to start exploring new areas and that is exactly what organisations like Microsoft want (and need), and as such they're heavily supporting it.

It's a really important time to be involved in the data platform right now and with things changing very quickly it makes a lot of sense to be both keeping up with changes and learning more about them. I'll post again shortly and explain some of the areas that I am focusing on but for now, I highly recommend if you haven't already take the time to learn a bit more about Azure or Linux or whatever appeals to you to advance your career as a data professionals.

As always, really interested to hear others views.

The future of the DBA role.

For quite some time now there has been a lot of talk on the various social media platforms regarding the future of the DBA role and whether or not it still has a place in the not so distant future.

I've actually wrote this post a few times but it's always ended up being a very lengthy read of epic proportions so I've decided to hack it to bits and get straight to the point(s) and hopefully open it up for some more discussion because I think it's a very hot topic still and I'm really interested to hear peoples opinions on where the role is heading.

Lets get straight to the point; is there a place for the DBA role? The answer to that is most definitely yes, whilst databases exist there will always be the need for administration, but as core administrative tasks are being automated there will be less for DBA to do along these lines.

One example I hear of why the DBA will still be very important is performance tuning, after all in cloud platforms you are literally going to pay for poor performance but then with the likes of automated index management and the arrival of the adaptive query processing family in SQL 2017 we can see that the time we spend on tuning activities could well be shrinking as well.

This is really where the concern is coming from but perhaps this is the wrong way of looking at things. Instead of worrying about what we're going to be doing, or rather not doing, we should be looking at how the technical landscape is changing and looking at the opportunities that lay within it.

Now I'm not saying for that we should all become data scientists (and nobody else is by the way), data science is hard but it is a great example of an emerging area within the data platform that we may seek to explore for own careers, in fact there is no real reason why anyone shouldn't spend at least a bit of time familiarising themselves with the technology and its capabilities. This goes for a lot of functionality now present within SQL Server; it's native support for R and Python, the likes of Always On and In-Memory OLTP becoming more prominent and the rise and rise of PowerShell automation, we can even run on Linux now and of course there is that cloud thing that everyone is talking about.

All of these technologies are integral parts of the Microsoft's vision for an ever widening data platform and as organisations look to implement them and leverage their advantages it is the DBA that can be at the forefront of this technical transformation, if they want to be.

This for me is the real point. The changing technical landscape is only a threat to those unwilling to explore new areas and learn new skills and this certainly doesn't apply exclusively to DBA's, whatever your involvement in IT this technical shift effects you and to put it bluntly, you can either go with it, or be left well behind. 

For DBA's there could be some areas that are out of the comfort zone, perhaps the Dev/BI stacks or architecture but thankfully there is an abundance of training material out there which doesn't cost a small fortune or in some cases anything at all, not to mention all the support coming from within the technical communities. The decision really is yours how you'd like to advance.

Now it is fair to say that organisations won't be simply moving to a new platform overnight, after all how many companies are still on SQL 2005 for example (if you need upgrading, give me a call) but rather than sit back and worry about what might happen and even worse do nothing about it, it's time to start looking at how the emerging technologies can benefit not just the organisations that you work with but how they can benefit you as a data professional.