TSQL Tuesday 93: Interviews

This month‘s event is hosted by the fabulous DBA/SQL-consultant (& part time cartoonist) Kendra Little! Go check out her blog, podcast, and training at sqlworkbooks.com – really great stuff.

DBA interviews are tricky.

The problem isn’t so much that the role is vaguely defined. Although, depending on the size of the IT org and the tech stack, it can vary widely from a jack-of-all (DB Dev, report writer, production ops, the works) to a highly specialized performance tuner who works with 7 other teammates, each of whom has a unique surgical specialty in the data platform. But that’s not the problem — well, not the main problem. It is a problem in the sense that the business folks, especially HR, are notoriously and astonishingly ignorant of what a DBA or related role actually involves. But you get past that once you start talking to the tech leads and IT directors.

No, the problem is that, like most higher level technical roles, you don’t really know how a candidate is going to function in it (the role) without actually seeing him or her.. IN it. Do they keep a cool head when production goes down? Do they have a solid plan of attack for the dreaded “everything is slow!” complaint-storm? Do they have a good handle on HA & DR architecture & implementation? Can you rely on them to actually practice and follow thru with those strategies? Can they be a continuous learner and keep abreast of new developments while still tempering that with wisdom & maturity, applying the correct tools to the proper problems? Do try add value to the team and organization by both teaching and learning from others?

These are truly difficult, complex questions that are nearly impossible to deeply assess and fully answer during an interview process. Largely because the only real evidence of their answers lies in actual experience. Sure, a cert here or an MVP there definitely helps your case. But at any rate, we try our best to chip away at the boulder.

aerosmith chip away at the stone record label
it was a record. from the 70s. it’s the best i could come up with. =P

Pivoting to a more positive note, I’ll share some of the better questions that I’ve experienced during my career so far.

Some good examples.

How would you design and build a data copy/sync process across/between tiered environments, say DEV-QA-PROD?

Really great question.  This is a common problem is small-to-medium enterprises with legacy systems where DevOps hasn’t quite reached down to the depths of the internal application stacks and people are still dealing with “refresh cycles” on the order of months, quarters, or even years.  You can approach it purely from a tooling perspective, but that’s not the whole picture.  Thus, it calls for some thought and team-culture ideas as well as “knowing the nerd-knobs”.

We have a complex process flow that involves a lot of stored procedures, say 50 total.  Some of these are non-sequential, meaning they can be executed in arbitrary order, while others need to be sequenced with each other in “blocks”.  This is a vendor product, so ultimately, the customer gets to decide the schedule and order of execution of this flow.  The solution needs to be maintainable by field engineers.  How would you handle this?

Woah.  Talk about diving down a rabbit-hole.  This is interesting in the sense that it exposes a bit of the architecture and some of the potential pain-points that the team is hoping to solve, while leaving enough room for improvement and experimentation by the hopeful candidate.  More to the point, it’s just an example of a more general technique, which to me is very effective: taking an architectural problem that actually comes from the “real world” (the company/team that’s interviewing) and asking for the candidate’s ideas on how to solve it.  You don’t need to get in-the-weeds super-detailed about it, but outlining your ideas helps indicate how you think about complex challenges and shows what kind of value-add you would bring to the team.

And finally, a perennial favorite:

Tell me about a time you broke production, and more importantly, how you addressed and resolved it.

So many stories from the trenches involve downtime and mistakes, it’s good to ‘bond’ over them.  It helps bring the egos back down to earth, and reminds us that we’re all just meatbags, making technology to do our bidding, occasionally to our own regret.  It shows the candidate’s “pressure cooker” mentality, or at least, what they tell you about it.

server did what you instructed it to...you don't say?
Don’t ya hate it when…

In conclusion.

If you’re a DBA, Dev, or IT pro, help your managers better understand your team’s needs when it comes to hiring.  Get involved in the job description write-ups and screening process questionnaires.  Barge your way into those ivory towers, if you have to — or you’ll regret the time you waste on candidates who really belong in a different role than the one you’re after.

If you’re a manager, PLEASE LISTEN to your reports and tech leads.  They know what makes a good team member, they’ve been doing it for a long time.  Don’t dismiss their advice or block them from being part of the hiring process — yes, they are busy, and yes, they can be crotchety, but their input is highly valuable toward bringing in effective & productive talent.

That’s all folks!

PS: I know I missed the “deadline” by about an hour..ish.  I blame DST.  Heck, it’s still Tuesday for the majority of the Western hemisphere.  I’m not biased, but I write in English, so… ya know.  Take it as you will.  Now excuse me while I go hide from the blog-police in my ASCII-bunker.

Indexing a HUGE Table

How it lost its original clustering key is a perfect topic for this month’s T-SQL Tuesday!

tsql2sday150x150

As previously referenced, we had a half-billion row table (which we’ll “round up” to a billion, just for the sake of argument) that needed an index.  A clustering key, to be exact.  How it lost its original clustering key isn’t that interesting is a perfect topic for this month’s T-SQL Tuesday (we planned to replace it, before realizing how long it would take, and had to cancel the job after it was removed but before it could finish adding the new one).  Anybody can drop an index; it takes mere milliseconds.  But to create (or rebuild) an index, the SQL engine needs to touch every single row that index will include, and of course for a clustered index, that’s errverybody.

So the “Lessons learned the hard way” are:

When planning an index replacement for a billion-row table, don’t just schedule the job as “drop old index, then create new index“, and expect nothing to go wrong.

..and..

Don’t try to index a billion-row table all at once.  Use a smarter methodology.  Unless you can literally afford to have that table be offline for several hours (depending on your hardware, and assuming you’re on Standard Edition.

Of course, some of you crazy kids with Expensive Edition are scoffing and thinking “Oh that’s nothin’!”, with your billions of rows and online index rebuilds.  Well you can go back to your fancy Always Encrypted data and your terabytes of RAM and just pretend I said “trillion” instead of “billion” — maybe that’ll fit your scale a bit better.  But for the rest of us mere mortals…

one billion records dr evil
it’s yuuge, I’m telling you…

Anyway, since we’re peons, we can’t just go create the billion-row index without taking the table offline.  So we need to come up with a way to minimize that downtime for the table, and avoid causing excessive blocking or I/O overload on the instance.  As I said before, SSIS to the rescue!

The Plan

i love it when a plan comes together
classic… plain and simple.

I call this the “setup, dump, & swap”.  Essentially we need to create an empty copy of the table, with the desired index(es), dump all the data into it, and then swap it in.  There are couple ways you can do this, but it boils down to the same basic premise: It’s “better” (probably not in terms of speed, but definitely in terms of efficiency and overhead) to fill this new copy of the table & its indexes, than it is to build the desired index on the existing table.

So here’s an outline:

  1. Script out the table (SSMS, right-click, script table, create to… or, if you use one of these cool extensions, F12 or similar “get definition” shortcut) — say, if the original is MyTable, script-create & replace MyTable with MyTableCopy
  2. Here’s a little room for choice.  You could create the table in the same schema with a new name; or, you could create the table in a different schema, with the same name or another name.  This will determine how you do the “swap” toward the end.
    • In the first case, we’d use sp_rename
    • In the 2nd, we’d use alter schema transfer
    • Both are essentially meta-data changes, but the latter could be potentially take a hair longer just because it pulls more strings; whereas the former requires taking care of dependencies ahead of time so you don’t break a schema-bound view or orphan a foreign key.
  3. Add the desired index(es), e.g. create clustered index CX_MyTableCopy_Datestamp_ThingName on dbo.MyTableCopy (Datestamp, ThingName)
  4. Build the SSIS task to copy the data from MyTable to MyTableCopy
  5. Schedule said task via SQL Agent.
  6. Use the previous tip to monitor its progress and estimate time to completion!
  7. Once done, prepare to swap!
    • Again, use sp_rename, and if needed, alter schema transfer.
    • Likely, this will involve several renames – the constraints and other indexes can’t be named the same either, so get all that stuff renamed with an _old suffix first, then you can swap the actual tables.
  8. Clean up after yourself and drop the old table once you verify everything’s working well and all dependencies are accounted for.

But Why?

can-you-tell-me-why
Fry shares your curiosity…

Let’s back up a bit.  Why are we doing it this way?  More importantly, what are the general use-cases for this kind of thing?  Well as I said, it’s “better” in certain ways, than simply creating the index on the “live” T.O.U.S.  It avoids locking said live table, and it has the potential to put less stress on the database and less synchronous I/O against its primary files.  Finally, and most importantly, as a bulk insert operation, with configurable batch sizing, the SSIS task will put exponentially less load on the transaction log.  Whereas, with the regular inline index creation, it could easily fill up the Tlog and will definitely cause performance issues.

Furthermore, swapping tables, or in more advanced cases, partitions, is a fantastic way to move massive amounts of data around with minimal impact.  It also happens to be quite helpful when we have to deal with indexing such massive amounts of data.

In my case, this was actually an archive of 2016 audit-trail data, so if I’d have chose, I could have taken it out of the partitioned view it was part of, and dealt with it being offline for several hours.  But because I’m a sucker for a good problem, and because I wanted to be able to semi-accurately monitor the progress to let the boss-man know when it might be done, I chose to take this route instead.  It’ll come in handy again soon, I’m sure — we have several other jumbo-tron tables laying about that may need some index tuning and/or partitioning.

So, happy swapping, and don’t let those T.O.U.S.‘s get the best of you!

rodent of unusual size
Meh, I don’t think they even exist!

 

PS: thanks to @SQLDoubleG for hosting, and thanks in advance to the rest of the community being lenient of my “submission” being a re-purposed existing post with a few extra blurbs thrown in to bring it on-topic!  =D