Should DBA have access to sar and top?

[Tim Barkley]

I came to a new shop as a DBA recently and discovered I am not allowed to
use either sar or top on a Unix server where Oracle database is installed.
Unix system administrator gave me some explanation why DBA is not allowed
to have access to sar and top, but to me it sounds ridiculous, to put it
modestly. I can't see how can one be expected to do serious Oracle
performance tuning and troubleshooting without those tools. I'm curious if
any of you ever ran into similar nonsense and how have you handled it.
Here's what I've was told:

"SAR and Top are system administrator tools and are therefore not required
by any other users. System performance monitoring is an expressed function
of the systems administrator. It is clearly stated in our job descriptions
as being part of our responsibilities. This responsibility is not
indicated in the job description of DBA's.

Additionally, these tools inflict an overhead of system resources, which
could compromise the running of a server if not controlled properly. SAR
especially utilizes a great number of resources (especially if all of the
parameters are used). Currently TNG is running performance monitoring (SAR
in the background) and we run performance metrics as well. If other users
also run these same monitors it would be a gross and unnecessary misuse of
server resources and undermine the integrity of the system with which we
are charged to maintain. Systems administrators are responsible for the
monitoring of all applications on the platform (Oracle, Unicenter, FTP
etc.) DBA's are responsible for the performance of their own individual
application and as such may use the dedicated OEM and statsback utilities."

Any comments are appreciated.

[Hans Forbrich]

Tim Barkley wrote:
I came to a new shop as a DBA recently and discovered I am not allowed to use either sar or top on a Unix server where Oracle database is installed. Unix system administrator gave me some explanation why DBA is not allowed to have access to sar and top, but to me it sounds ridiculous, to put it modestly. I can't see how can one be expected to do serious Oracle performance tuning and troubleshooting without those tools. I'm curious if any of you ever ran into similar nonsense and how have you handled it. Here's what I've was told: "SAR and Top are system administrator tools and are therefore not required by any other users. System performance monitoring is an expressed function of the systems administrator. It is clearly stated in our job descriptions as being part of our responsibilities. This responsibility is not indicated in the job description of DBA's.

Are you in a Union shop? It sounds like someone has read a rule book and
believes that 'rules is rules and they ain't gonna change for nuttin'. My
gut says 'get out now'.

In other similar situations, I've found the SA is trying to put you in your
place, pull seniority, pull weight or hide something (such as ignorance) -
or it's in the union book on page 17, paragraph 5, subsection 1.3.9 and
"I'm (*&^-well gonna teach you to follow the rules".

I'm of the school that believes in holistic tuning - things interact and you
have to understand the big picture as well as the little details.
Therefore I believe you should have access to the results of both SAR and
top, if not access to the utilities them selves. However, there are a
number of other tools that you can use within the Oracle toolkit that you
might want to reach for first (statspack, Oracle Enterprise Manager
Diagnostic and Tuning packs) and then come up with a specific request for
info from the SA - preferrably at awkward hours <g>.
Additionally, these tools inflict an overhead of system resources, which could compromise the running of a server if not controlled properly. SAR especially utilizes a great number of resources (especially if all of the parameters are used). Currently TNG is running performance monitoring (SAR in the background) and we run performance metrics as well. If other users also run these same monitors it would be a gross and unnecessary misuse of server resources and undermine the integrity of the system with which we are charged to maintain. Systems administrators are responsible for the monitoring of all applications on the platform (Oracle, Unicenter, FTP etc.) DBA's are responsible for the performance of their own individual application and as such may use the dedicated OEM and statsback utilities." Any comments are appreciated.

A DBA is NOT other users. A DBA works on behalf of other users AND on
behalf of the SA to ensure that the processes are operating properly. As a
matter of fact, the DBA and the SA SHOULD^H^H^H^H^H^H^H MUST work as a
complementary team.

However, as long as you have access to the data when you need it, you don't
really need to run the tools themselves.

You may want to look at Chapter 1 of the Database Administration Guide, one
of the first manuals in 'List of Books' within the doc set for your
database version at http://docs.oracle.com ... that chapter discusses roles
and responsibilities.

It also seems the SA has some background or history, possibly a myth taought
in some UNIX class (I've seen those as well). You may also ask the SA if
he's had any bad run-ins with the tools that are causing this reaction.

One other tip - while CA Unicenter, BMC Patrol, etc. have their good points,
Oracle is going full bore on Enterprise Manager. Within a few version I
suspect you will have no choice but to use that to manage the environment.
You might want to talk to the the local Oracle (OEM) presales guys and have
them work with your SA for a while.

Bottom line - brush up your people skills if you intend to stay there.

HTH
/Hans
BTW - cross posting is not necessary - please move this to cdo.misc

[Dusan Bolek]

Tim Barkley <notmyemail@msnn.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94B8E34D178D5teulen@66.185.95.104>... "SAR and Top are system administrator tools and are therefore not required by any other users. System performance monitoring is an expressed function of the systems administrator. It is clearly stated in our job descriptions as being part of our responsibilities. This responsibility is not indicated in the job description of DBA's.

I think this is OK. As long as they provide you an appropriate output
and are willing to change parameters of monitoring as you needed,
there is really no reason for you to meddle with SAR. However, I think
that TOP should be available to others as well.

--
Dusan Bolek

[Daniel Morgan]

Tim Barkley wrote:
I came to a new shop as a DBA recently and discovered I am not allowed to use either sar or top on a Unix server where Oracle database is installed. Unix system administrator gave me some explanation why DBA is not allowed to have access to sar and top, but to me it sounds ridiculous, to put it modestly. I can't see how can one be expected to do serious Oracle performance tuning and troubleshooting without those tools. I'm curious if any of you ever ran into similar nonsense and how have you handled it. Here's what I've was told: "SAR and Top are system administrator tools and are therefore not required by any other users. System performance monitoring is an expressed function of the systems administrator. It is clearly stated in our job descriptions as being part of our responsibilities. This responsibility is not indicated in the job description of DBA's. Additionally, these tools inflict an overhead of system resources, which could compromise the running of a server if not controlled properly. SAR especially utilizes a great number of resources (especially if all of the parameters are used). Currently TNG is running performance monitoring (SAR in the background) and we run performance metrics as well. If other users also run these same monitors it would be a gross and unnecessary misuse of server resources and undermine the integrity of the system with which we are charged to maintain. Systems administrators are responsible for the monitoring of all applications on the platform (Oracle, Unicenter, FTP etc.) DBA's are responsible for the performance of their own individual application and as such may use the dedicated OEM and statsback utilities." Any comments are appreciated.

Gads another one that posts to every usenet group with the word Oracle
in its name. What does this inquiry have to do with 3 of the 4?

I'm in agreement with Hans. Keep pushing your resume out until you
find a job where they are more interested in quality of performance
than rules.

Also be advised that a job interview is a two way street. I never, make
that NEVER EVER, take on a project without inquiring as to whether
essential tools will be given to me or whether I will need to fight for
them. The last time, during an interview, someone said to me that such
tools would not be available I terminated the interview got up and
walked out the door. The look on their faces was priceless. I
understand that the person that got the project ... also got the tools.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Bass Chorng]

We have similar "rules" to discourage DBAs using top, especially
when there is a high load. But I can't understand why sar. Did
they ever explain that ?

You can use "top -b" to get a snapshot of top. This will not use
a lot of CPU cycles like the continuous mode. Usually I find that
good enough for performance tuning purposes.

Your sys adms need to learn how to trust DBAs.

Regards.

[Joel Garry]

Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1080524456.343073@yasure>... Tim Barkley wrote: I came to a new shop as a DBA recently and discovered I am not allowed to use either sar or top on a Unix server where Oracle database is installed. Unix system administrator gave me some explanation why DBA is not allowed to have access to sar and top, but to me it sounds ridiculous, to put it modestly. I can't see how can one be expected to do serious Oracle performance tuning and troubleshooting without those tools. I'm curious if any of you ever ran into similar nonsense and how have you handled it. Here's what I've was told: "SAR and Top are system administrator tools and are therefore not required by any other users. System performance monitoring is an expressed function of the systems administrator. It is clearly stated in our job descriptions as being part of our responsibilities. This responsibility is not indicated in the job description of DBA's. Additionally, these tools inflict an overhead of system resources, which could compromise the running of a server if not controlled properly. SAR especially utilizes a great number of resources (especially if all of the parameters are used). Currently TNG is running performance monitoring (SAR in the background) and we run performance metrics as well. If other users also run these same monitors it would be a gross and unnecessary misuse of server resources and undermine the integrity of the system with which we are charged to maintain. Systems administrators are responsible for the monitoring of all applications on the platform (Oracle, Unicenter, FTP etc.) DBA's are responsible for the performance of their own individual application and as such may use the dedicated OEM and statsback utilities." Any comments are appreciated. Gads another one that posts to every usenet group with the word Oracle in its name. What does this inquiry have to do with 3 of the 4? I'm in agreement with Hans. Keep pushing your resume out until you find a job where they are more interested in quality of performance than rules. Also be advised that a job interview is a two way street. I never, make that NEVER EVER, take on a project without inquiring as to whether essential tools will be given to me or whether I will need to fight for them. The last time, during an interview, someone said to me that such tools would not be available I terminated the interview got up and walked out the door. The look on their faces was priceless. I understand that the person that got the project ... also got the tools.

Sounds like that person had the people skills to do the job. :-)

But seriously, many large organizations are as Hans described, and
taking a hard line up front simply isn't the correct approach. Yes,
there obviously is turf-protection and CYA and explicit written denial
of necessary tools. But does this mean it is an untenable situation?
No. Well, it might, so in that case the walkout _is_ the correct
answer. More likely, it is an organization, with all the frailties,
discordancies and schizophrenia that implies. It is a collection of
problems, which means the person with solutions can prosper.

Specifically, you must first lay low and collect intelligence. You
have a brief period of time to "prove" yourself and fit into the
organization, with some latitude for being the newby. Identify
weakness, opponents, possible mentors and allies, a brief list of
problems that can be solved quickly and visibly, and longer range
important goals. Treat everyone as if they will be your boss someday.
Especially, be nice to the jerk sysadmins, you will likely find out
soon enough who has what opinion of them, and to whom it matters. It
is entirely possible that managers don't really understand what their
own DBA staff does, and that is probably where the silly job
description came from. This is more of an advantage than it seems,
because if you can show management how you can make whatever is
important to them better by giving you what you need, you can
eventually ask to rewrite it to your own specs. As far as the SA's,
you might suggest a tool that allows you to run whatever they allow
you to run with tracking and accountability (like sudo on unix). See,
now you've minimized their work without alienating them, and they even
may think they have increased power over you with more CYA for
themselves. If they are too paranoid even for that, propose a testing
project where they have to do stuff to monitor your testing - then
either they will learn to work with you, or show everyone how useless
they are.

Or just sit back and do whatever your job description says all day
until you find a better place. Physical device performance tuning
shouldn't really take up too much of a DBA's time, eh?

I don't think I've had a computer job yet that is exactly as described
beforehand.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Dennis_v3/

[Daniel Morgan]

Joel Garry wrote:
Sounds like that person had the people skills to do the job. :-)

Actually what they told me led me to believe that having their prime
candidate turn them down caused them to rethink what they were doing.
There aren't a lot of people that turn down jobs ... I do.
But seriously, many large organizations are as Hans described, and taking a hard line up front simply isn't the correct approach.

If you are looking for a job I agree to a point. Unless you need that
next paycheck to survive though ... why take on a job where the best
you can hope for is mediocrity and frustration.

I am lucky to be in the position where I can live off what the
university pays me. So additional projects are only accepted if I
choose to accept them.
jg

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Joel Garry]

Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1080617002.946274@yasure>... Joel Garry wrote: Sounds like that person had the people skills to do the job. :-) Actually what they told me led me to believe that having their prime candidate turn them down caused them to rethink what they were doing. There aren't a lot of people that turn down jobs ... I do.

I have, but not lately. The mode is, suddenly everyone wants me, I
pick one place, eventually everyone forgets about me, place ends
suddenly, 3-6 months to get another job from scratch. I think of it
in Corvette equivalents - 6 months pay = new Corvette (about $50K US).
The frustrating part is I know how many places need my skills, but I
can't keep them all on the line for long, and can't (well, won't)
compete with new grads. And between commuting and the intensity of
projects, I can't multitask.
But seriously, many large organizations are as Hans described, and taking a hard line up front simply isn't the correct approach. If you are looking for a job I agree to a point. Unless you need that next paycheck to survive though ... why take on a job where the best you can hope for is mediocrity and frustration.

Most people where I live can't even handle missing two paychecks. I'm
better off than most, but the last two Corvette equivalents were a
bitch. Almost downsized to a paid-off average house the last time.
Average house is 8 Corvette equivalents here. I would much rather
keep my conspicuous consumptive house. Can't do it on university pay
(depending on campus, quite a wide variance, untenured lecturers get
crap), at least until kids are old enough to allow wifey to do it
full-time (she's done that [in clinical psychology], doesn't want to
either). I don't want to teach, anyhow, I don't have near as much
patience as you and Howard. :-)
I am lucky to be in the position where I can live off what the university pays me. So additional projects are only accepted if I choose to accept them.

Of course, I meant to redirect the comments to the OP.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
The alternative minimum tax is "a parallel 'secret' tax system that
threatens to increase taxpayers' cynicism to the point where it will
have an impact on their willingness to follow the tax laws." - Nina
Olsen