Ignorance is bliss…. or is it?

Standard

see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-speak-no-evilI recently read a post from LinkedIn where a dba had to use a tool to get certain warnings. If any other
warnings didn’t show in the third party tool than it should be ignored.

When I look at the situation I have mixed feelings about the choices the company made. I’ve worked in several environments where I had these situation too. You could just ignore all the signs and go back to the normal things of the day but than you shouldn’t do this kind of work.

I agree that a standard tool should be used when a company doesn’t have a full time dba on staff. I can imagine when a non-dba has to interpret all kinds of code and information from different sources that things can get complicated.

On the other hand, when the tool doesn’t show possible errors and warnings which could possibly be harmful for the production environment than you shouldn’t use the tool or use it partially.

I would do try to find essential information that wasn’t visible to the monitoring tool and contact the supplier to maybe adjust or inform me that the information was visible. If my information was that essential for the continuity I would also get management involved and get them involved in the fact that the monitoring of the systems wasn’t complete or inefficient.

How far you should go with explaining the situation is up to you?
At the end, as the dba, you’re responsible for the databases and data in it. When push comes to shove and you have an issue that wasn’t in the monitoring than you’re still responsible to fix it.

 

 

Leave a Reply