Browse > Home / Technology / It’s 11 O’Clock. Do You Know Where Your Databases Are?

It’s 11 O’Clock. Do You Know Where Your Databases Are?

November 11, 2008

Where are your databases? (And what is your strategy for knowing…)
Saying and doing are two different things. This is true and it’s also a good delineation along the lines of databases. How’s that you say? Well, for one thing, I have never worked anywhere recently (last dozen years or so) that had one database technology in play. Different products have different value propositions, especially over time – as new features and capabilities are rolled into existing product lines and even new database technologies are introduced. Recently I had an engagement where they used IBM’s DB2, Oracle 10g, Sql Server, Sybase, My Sql, Informix and even Red Brick (never heard of that one before). Sounds like it’s out of control, doesn’t it? Well, to tell you the truth, it wasn’t and here’s how I got there.

First of all, they had a strategy. This strategy was built on a common taxonomy of terms that was agreed upon by all parts of the organization. These terms were used to classify and underpin the database technologies. With these terms, there was a foundation and a single version of understanding in which to base conversations and negotiations on. Here is an example that might be helpful for you.

Proposed (or Candidate) – This category represents those technologies (databases) that someone or a team would like to be considered as part of the enterprise architecture. The process has not yet started for technologies with this classification, but they have been identified as having some initial momentum towards inclusion.

New (or Emerging) – This term does not reflect the current state of the technology, but rather the current state in the context of the organization. For example, the technologies with this classification have been approved and accepted as part of the enterprise’s strategy, but with a limited focus. These technologies indicate that there is a high degree of oversight in when, how and where they are used. It could well be that there is a need for DB2 (which is not a new technology by any stretch of the imagination), and in this case it could be that DB2 is ‘emerging’ in the context that the organization does not yet recognize this as a standard, but has agreed that it can be (should be) used within limited scope with oversight.

Standard (or Approved) – This term denotes that these technologies and products are used within the normal business practices. When these products are leveraged, there is not much discussion on scope and the oversight is usually limited to the technical framework in place versus the bigger discussions of should we and could we and how would it impact the rest of the organization and so on… We like to have standards so that we can focus our attention on solving business problems and not on political positioning and other side issues.

Contained (or Restricted)- This term refers to those technologies that are ‘restricted’. These are non standard and are usually relegated to existing applications. This is an important part of the strategy. While the scope is known, the oversight is focused on limiting the proliferation of these technologies for reasons of enterprise impact on the overarching strategy.

Declining (or Phasing Out)- This term refers to all those technologies that are being identified as ones we wish to sunset. Here this technology, while still in production, is not allowed for any new use and a plan is in place (that also includes a sunset date) for its removal from the organization.

Retired (or Removed) – This term refers to those technologies that are not allowed to be used at all under any circumstances within the organization. A formal write up of the justification and historic retirement plan must accompany the technology.

One important thing to note is that this taxonomy of classification is not linear. It could be that My Sql was identified as a candidate and after the proper feasibility discussions and general impact analysis, it was promoted to emerging. After some experience and discussions, it might be that My Sql becomes established within a niche use. When this is the case, My Sql would be promoted to contained; not that we want to phase out the product, rather, we want to liberate is growth but highly restrict it to a certain scope of use.

Start to understand your environment and where your technologies are located within the database strategy 101. Set goals to identify those that are too costly and create a strategy to sunset them. At the same time, look out on the horizon and see those new (or new to you) technologies that may play a part in your organization in the (near) future – start to embrace them and set processes up to manage them as they flow from term to term within the organization. Determine what your real standards are and socialize them. It could be that your headaches of the future can be averted if you properly set up a containment strategy. The benefits are there for you to harvest, but you have to do your part by leading the way.

Once we know what we have and classify those database technologies (or any technology or practice), we can then focus on the implementation of the strategy; Better, Faster and Cheaper. For without this mature taxonomy and disciplined approach, we will struggle to get a hold of our infrastructure and we need to be able to not only get a hold of our infrastructure, but to wrestle it to the ground an show it who is boss!
Enjoy the Journey!

~ Scott Felten

Written by Scott Felten · Filed Under Technology 

Comments

Got something to say?