DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Tomas Guest

    DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?


    All,

    I have worked in Software Development for the past eight years with Visual
    Basic, Visual C++ and the big three (Oracle, SQL Server & Informix). Iím
    looking to add that ďicing on the cakeĒ to my skill set. At this point, Iíve
    come down to the MCDBA with SQL Server 2000 or the Oracle DBA with Oracle
    9i.

    I was wondering if anyone has some thoughtful insight as to which skill set
    will be most advantageous. From what I have seen, the SQL Server certification
    will probably offer a greater number of jobs with lower pay. Conversely,
    the Oracle DBA certification will probably offer slightly fewer jobs with
    higher pay. Does anyone have any insight?

    I appreciate any thoughtful comments. However, I do not wish to start a discussion
    on the value or merits of certification.

    Thanks,

    Tomas


  2. #2
    Michael Gautier Guest

    Re: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?


    Depends on your area. I've seen situations where the company uses Microsoft
    technologies for web and client/server development but if they are predominately
    a mainframe shop then they will have Oracle as a backend.

    If you can get both, get the SQL 2000 first, but if your time is limited
    go Oracle since that will take you through the long term.

    If you are targeting .NET exclusively, then I would keep in touch with SQL
    Server as it will get a "powerful" upgrade in a year that will make it more
    compelling for application developers than Oracle, but it will still depend
    on the company.





    "Tomas" <ttomas@nospammyplease.com> wrote:
    >
    >All,
    >
    >I have worked in Software Development for the past eight years with Visual
    >Basic, Visual C++ and the big three (Oracle, SQL Server & Informix). Iím
    >looking to add that ďicing on the cakeĒ to my skill set. At this point,

    Iíve
    >come down to the MCDBA with SQL Server 2000 or the Oracle DBA with Oracle
    >9i.
    >
    >I was wondering if anyone has some thoughtful insight as to which skill

    set
    >will be most advantageous. From what I have seen, the SQL Server certification
    >will probably offer a greater number of jobs with lower pay. Conversely,
    >the Oracle DBA certification will probably offer slightly fewer jobs with
    >higher pay. Does anyone have any insight?
    >
    >I appreciate any thoughtful comments. However, I do not wish to start a

    discussion
    >on the value or merits of certification.
    >
    >Thanks,
    >
    >Tomas
    >



  3. #3
    Elena Guest

    Re: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?


    One point about this "Oracle Pays Better" concept.

    Oracle has been around much longer than SQL Server and is well-entrenched
    in the large corporate shops. These Oracle environments are often very large
    and very complex. This is why some Oracle DBA jobs pay better. However,
    inexperienced DBAs are not usually considered for these jobs.

    You might be better off going with SQL Server because you actually have a
    chance of getting a SQL Server DBA job in a smaller company. (Particularly
    because you can work part-time as an application developer and thus wear
    two hats - - always important in smaller companies.) Getting real DBA experience
    in SQL Server is much better than having an Oracle cert but never getting
    a DBA job. I've seen SQL Server DBAs move over to Oracle and vice versa.


    It's a strategic decision that you will have to make.

    Elena

  4. #4
    MarkN Guest

    Re: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?


    Typically, Oracle is used in an Unix environment.

    Some other things to consider.
    Oracle, in addition to DB2, runs on almost every OS. DB2 runs on a few more
    than Oracle. SQL Server runs only on the Windows OS and will continue only
    do so for the forseeable future, although I would venture to guess it is
    the most used database (server type) on Windows.

    All of these databases continue to improve and need less monitoring than
    in the past. So for most (experience is my only proof) installations, a
    full time DBA(or any at all) is not required. Large systems still require
    the services of DBAs. In these types of systems SQL Server is not typically
    used. Due to current cost savings, the current server-side trend is towards
    Linux and Linux on the Mainframe. This saves space, licensing, hardware
    and personnel. For pure mainframe\midrange environments, the main relational
    database used is DB2. I've never heard of Oracle on the mainframe till now.

    Another thing, and Michael mentioned it, Oracle, IBM, and Microsoft are integrating
    their products more, although Oracle doesn't have some of the tools the other
    two have (i.e. Message Queueing). So databases do more now than just store
    data. The trend here is to make the database disappear (I will look for
    the links if you need them) - and it is.

    .Net is a big step for Microsoft and brings their web tools on par (ability
    wise) with things already available for Java, and in some cases it is better
    and others still not as good. Anyway, .Net is being worked on for other
    platforms. What life that will be viably available is anybody's guess.
    The issue here is that while Windows .Net code will run on Linux .Net, the
    same set of supporting tools will not be there. So to get it to run there,
    it will need to be code generically which takes any advantage away from .Net
    and other MS tools integration. With IBM and Oracle(somewhat) their tools
    already work on other platforms so anyone who desires to take advantage of
    integration can do so.

    I agree with Michael that you should keep in mind what is being used in your
    area and the types of organizations you'd work for and what they use.

    Mark

    "Michael Gautier" <gautier_michael@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >Depends on your area. I've seen situations where the company uses Microsoft
    >technologies for web and client/server development but if they are predominately
    >a mainframe shop then they will have Oracle as a backend.
    >
    >If you can get both, get the SQL 2000 first, but if your time is limited
    >go Oracle since that will take you through the long term.
    >
    >If you are targeting .NET exclusively, then I would keep in touch with SQL
    >Server as it will get a "powerful" upgrade in a year that will make it more
    >compelling for application developers than Oracle, but it will still depend
    >on the company.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >"Tomas" <ttomas@nospammyplease.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>All,
    >>
    >>I have worked in Software Development for the past eight years with Visual
    >>Basic, Visual C++ and the big three (Oracle, SQL Server & Informix). Iím
    >>looking to add that ďicing on the cakeĒ to my skill set. At this point,

    >Iíve
    >>come down to the MCDBA with SQL Server 2000 or the Oracle DBA with Oracle
    >>9i.
    >>
    >>I was wondering if anyone has some thoughtful insight as to which skill

    >set
    >>will be most advantageous. From what I have seen, the SQL Server certification
    >>will probably offer a greater number of jobs with lower pay. Conversely,
    >>the Oracle DBA certification will probably offer slightly fewer jobs with
    >>higher pay. Does anyone have any insight?
    >>
    >>I appreciate any thoughtful comments. However, I do not wish to start a

    >discussion
    >>on the value or merits of certification.
    >>
    >>Thanks,
    >>
    >>Tomas
    >>

    >



  5. #5
    simon Guest

    Re: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?

    Tomas,

    It looks like you have already getting some good advices from the other
    posters. However, allow me to add my $0.02.

    First of all, if you are planning to stay as a software developer (my
    assumption, so correct me if I am wrong), you may not need to have the
    full-blown knowledge of a DBA. And getting a DBA certification might
    requires you to get into too much details in that area, which takes up your
    valuable time. So you need to consider the tradeoff.

    Secondly, if a company is big enough to use Oracle servers, chances are they
    also have SQL Servers (as well as the other database servers). But not the
    other way around. Therefore, if you are developing software in this mixed
    environment, you will need to know how to integrate all these different
    database systems.

    Based on my assumption above and my assumption that you like to develop
    enterprise software (again, correct me if my assumption is wrong), my
    suggestion is for you to master both Oracle and SQL Server, to the level
    that is adequate for software development and not as a full-blown DBA.

    Hope this helps.

    simon.


    "Tomas" <ttomas@nospammyplease.com> wrote in message
    news:3c459edd$1@147.208.176.211...
    >
    > All,
    >
    > I have worked in Software Development for the past eight years with Visual
    > Basic, Visual C++ and the big three (Oracle, SQL Server & Informix). I'm
    > looking to add that "icing on the cake" to my skill set. At this point,

    I've
    > come down to the MCDBA with SQL Server 2000 or the Oracle DBA with Oracle
    > 9i.
    >
    > I was wondering if anyone has some thoughtful insight as to which skill

    set
    > will be most advantageous. From what I have seen, the SQL Server

    certification
    > will probably offer a greater number of jobs with lower pay. Conversely,
    > the Oracle DBA certification will probably offer slightly fewer jobs with
    > higher pay. Does anyone have any insight?
    >
    > I appreciate any thoughtful comments. However, I do not wish to start a

    discussion
    > on the value or merits of certification.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Tomas
    >




  6. #6
    Tomas Guest

    Re: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?


    Simon,

    You are correct by assuming I want to stay in development. My desire to get
    the DBA certification is fueled by my desire to broaden my skill set. For
    many positions, a good grasp of T-SQL or PL\SQL would be enough. However,
    I have encountered a few positions, which required strong development skills
    and DBA skills.

    By studying the materials and passing the DBA exams, it at least gives one
    a good grasp of the basics. At that point, I'd spend more time with the product
    and learn more. Could I sell myself exclusively as a DBA? I do not think
    so. I'd be able to sell myself as a strong developer with DBA skills.

    Learning more about databases is attractive because they are generally more
    static than development skills. If you had some who was an Oracle god in
    1994, he or she would have some things to learn to come up to speed. However,
    if you had a VB or VC god in 1994, he or she would have a lot more ground
    to cover. This is magnified if you look at the certifications. Oracle offers
    a single upgrade test for each version. The MCSDs had to go through three
    different tracks over the past eight years or so with twelve or more tests.
    In the end, the database skills, once acquired, seem easier to keep up to
    date.

    Tomas


  7. #7
    simon Guest

    Re: DBA Certification: Oracle 9i or SQL Server 2000?

    "Tomas" <nospam@nospamm.com> wrote in message
    news:3c47030a$1@147.208.176.211...
    <snip>
    > Learning more about databases is attractive because they are generally

    more
    > static than development skills.

    <snip>

    I partially agree on this statement. Yes, database skill is more stable
    over the years. However, I think the "attractive" part of learning the
    database skill is to be able to develop better software and better system.
    And it takes more than a good grasp of Transact-SQL and PL/SQL. It requires
    most of the knowledge of a DBA (esp the table structure and data structure
    sides), without actually being a DBA. And this is what I meant by
    "adequate" for software development. Because of that, I don't think it is
    necessary for a developer to acquire a DBA certification....but this is
    beyond the scope of this discussion since you don't want to talk about that.
    =)

    Anyway, if you have the time and the money (I am a strong advocate on
    getting your employer to flip the bill), by all means get the DBA
    certification. You got nothing to lose.

    simon.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center