Обсуждение: Certification

Hi,

as you may already know roughly a year ago the Linux Foundation has started
offering vendor neutral and even distribution agnostic certifications for
Linux sysadmins and engineers
(https://training.linuxfoundation.org/certification).  I mentioned to them
that in my opinion this is something that the PostgreSQL world would need as
well and they expressed an interest in developing one. But they don't want to
do it without community involvement.

Therefore I'd like to assemble a group here that has an interest in this topic
to discuss and figure out the details. Who'd be interested?

Also, since this may result in us taking about content, I think we should
create a dedicated and non-public mailing list for it. Or else it might not be
worth the effort. How would this actually be handled?

One core member already expressed an interest so I guess the information flow
will not be a problem.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

Hi Michael,

This is a great idea and I'm interested to be part of this group.

Speaking for DALIBO, we have started a process to build an evaluation program for our trainings.
These post-training evaluations allow our trainees to go through a series of questions and rate their understanding of
thecourse.  

Although we do not use the word "certification", it is very close and we'd happy to offer to our trainees the
possibilityto get a community-backed certification. 

For now the series of questions we have built are in French, but we'd be happy to translate them, share them with a
dedicatedgroup and eventually transfer this content to the PGDG. We can also provide feedback on the open source tools
weuse to run the evaluations. 

Creating a certification is a long process and it can easily lead to endless discussions without anybody doing actual
work.I think the key to success here is to assemble a small group of a person who effectively have a quantified amout
oftime to spend on it and a concrete training experience. 

Regards,

--
Damien Clochard

Ah,  the old "certification" fallacy!

Certifications, like degrees, only tell hiring managers and recruiters the certification holder has passed a set of
requirementsand/or tests, which may or may not be available or even comprehensible to the interested party.  They say
nothingabout work ethic, native intelligence, ability to work and play well with others, ingenuity, broader knowledge
base,or effectiveness.  Consequently I have found them useless in making hiring decisions (although those were Oracle
DBAs)and suspect the certification process was being promoted as a necessity to sell more training courses. 

I know EnterpriseDB and CertFirst provide certification programs.  A quick Google search shows this effort has been
attemptedbefore by SRA.  I do not know the quality of these programs. 

I, for one, am more likely to ask if someone has read Greg Smith's book ("Who's Greg Smith?" - out at first), which
mailinglists they are follow and how often ("What mailing list?" - out at second), or what is their favorite feature in
PostgreSQL("Joins!" - out at third).  I am more interested in in their knowhow and interest in expanding their skills
thena mere certification. 

However, for those who live in that sad world where certifications are a minimum entry level requirement, a
certificationcreated by community consensus makes sense, so long as the criteria for certification are open and public. 

Note:  The opinions above are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect any official position of AWeber, its management,
oremployees. 

Bob Lunney
Senior Database Engineer
AWeber Communications, LLC
1100 Manor Drive
Chalfont, PA  18914 USA



> On Oct 29, 2015, at 5:43 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> as you may already know roughly a year ago the Linux Foundation has started
> offering vendor neutral and even distribution agnostic certifications for
> Linux sysadmins and engineers
> (https://training.linuxfoundation.org/certification).  I mentioned to them
> that in my opinion this is something that the PostgreSQL world would need as
> well and they expressed an interest in developing one. But they don't want to
> do it without community involvement.
>
> Therefore I'd like to assemble a group here that has an interest in this topic
> to discuss and figure out the details. Who'd be interested?
>
> Also, since this may result in us taking about content, I think we should
> create a dedicated and non-public mailing list for it. Or else it might not be
> worth the effort. How would this actually be handled?
>
> One core member already expressed an interest so I guess the information flow
> will not be a problem.
>
> Michael
> --
> Michael Meskes
> Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
> Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
> Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
> VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Bob Lunney <bobl@aweber.com> wrote:
> I, for one, am more likely to ask if someone has read Greg Smith's book ("Who's Greg Smith?" - out at first), which
mailinglists they are follow and how often ("What mailing list?" - out at second), or what is their favorite feature in
PostgreSQL("Joins!" - out at third).  I am more interested in in their knowhow and interest in expanding their skills
thena mere certification. 
>

This is true for pretty much every job, every position, every context,
every community.
Certification is not meant to prove passion, but that you are able to
do a specific set of things.Of course it does not mean you can do in
the better way, but at least you are supposed to be able to do and
therefore you are supposed to be fired if don't do them.

> However, for those who live in that sad world where certifications are a minimum entry level requirement, a
certificationcreated by community consensus makes sense, so long as the criteria for certification are open and public. 


I've done the BSD certification, and it has a very interesting point
in my opinion: certification is automatically renewed if you prove you
have been "community" friendly in a technical way (i.e., you have
written at least n papers on a technical subject related to BSD,
etc.).

I remember back in 2007 there was quite an effort to promote a
PostgreSQL certification group based on BSD experience (if my memory
serves well Joshua was on board of such effort). I don't remember why
it failed and why we don't have one yet.
I guess we are much more interested in making things run smooth than
in comparing our scores.

Luca

On 10/29/2015 02:43 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Also, since this may result in us taking about content, I think we should
> create a dedicated and non-public mailing list for it. Or else it might not be
> worth the effort. How would this actually be handled?

I think this should be a closed list run by the Linux Foundation.

Because some members of the community have a conflict of interest, I'm
not certain we can have a certification endorsed by "the whole community".

I would be willing to review the test questions (and suggest some), as
well as reviewing overall coverage.

However, the first question we should have with this is "what problem
are we solving?"

That is, are the EnterpriseDB/SRA/etc. certifications not good enough?
Not widely available enough or available in enough languages?  Do people
not believe in them because they are offered by support companies?

If there isn't an actual problem to be solved, then it seems like it
would be better to leave certification to commercial entities as a way
to make money off PostgreSQL.  If there is a deficiency, we need to make
sure that an LF certification will address that specific deficiency.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

> I think this should be a closed list run by the Linux Foundation.

Why's that? I'm willing to put up a list we can use for discussion.

> Because some members of the community have a conflict of interest, I'm
> not certain we can have a certification endorsed by "the whole community".

Depends on what you call "endorsed". Nobody expects us to say this is the one
and only.

> I would be willing to review the test questions (and suggest some), as
> well as reviewing overall coverage.

Ok, thanks. BTW we're not talking questions here, but tasks to be performed.

> However, the first question we should have with this is "what problem
> are we solving?"
>
> That is, are the EnterpriseDB/SRA/etc. certifications not good enough?

At the very least they are not vendor neutral.

> to make money off PostgreSQL.  If there is a deficiency, we need to make
> sure that an LF certification will address that specific deficiency.

Again, by its very setup I think it solves the major problem.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

29 octobre 2015 14:52 "Bob Lunney" <bobl@aweber.com> a écrit:
> Ah, the old "certification" fallacy!
>
> Certifications, like degrees, only tell hiring managers and recruiters the certification holder has
> passed a set of requirements and/or tests, which may or may not be available or even comprehensible
> to the interested party. [...]
>

I think this is not the only point of a certification. Actually a lot a trainees are interested by getting an
evaluationat the end of the course. It's a rewarding experience in itself to see how much you've improved your
knowledge.Of course you can do that by running a mere evaluation. But delivering a certification is even more
rewarding,and it makes even more sense if it's a community-backed vendor-independent diploma. You even see that as as
anact of community onboarding. 

--
Damien

All,

Yes, I wish what fruitful idea and assess the Diploma in PostgreSQL we did
in Cuba.

Everything comes as in their countries a need for active members and their
companies, the Cuban community there, I think with the University of
Computer Sciences an Diploma to provide those interested in obtaining a
Certificate. At least in Cuba.

Saludos,
Gilberto Castillo
ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba

Damien,

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say below.  Using certifications as a training and motivational tool is
perfectlyappropriate. 

My past experience, however, is with folks who view certifications as merit badges, and sum up the number of
certificationsto rank tech workers.  This behavior incentivized some people to become "certification collectors".  It
didnot, however, correlate into particularly effective co-workers. 

I am not opposed to a PostgreSQL certification, per se, but to the attitude that a single certification is sufficient
tobecome effective and constructive at database administration and development. 

Bob Lunney
Senior Database Engineer
AWeber Communications, LLC
1100 Manor Drive
Chalfont, PA  18914 USA

Note:  The opinions above are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect any official or unofficial stance for AWeber.


> On Oct 30, 2015, at 5:48 AM, damien@dalibo.info wrote:
>
> 29 octobre 2015 14:52 "Bob Lunney" <bobl@aweber.com> a écrit:
>> Ah, the old "certification" fallacy!
>>
>> Certifications, like degrees, only tell hiring managers and recruiters the certification holder has
>> passed a set of requirements and/or tests, which may or may not be available or even comprehensible
>> to the interested party. [...]
>>
>
> I think this is not the only point of a certification. Actually a lot a trainees are interested by getting an
evaluationat the end of the course. It's a rewarding experience in itself to see how much you've improved your
knowledge.Of course you can do that by running a mere evaluation. But delivering a certification is even more
rewarding,and it makes even more sense if it's a community-backed vendor-independent diploma. You even see that as as
anact of community onboarding. 
>
> --
> Damien

On 10/30/2015 12:41 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
>> I think this should be a closed list run by the Linux Foundation.
>
> Why's that? I'm willing to put up a list we can use for discussion.

That's also fine.  I just mean "not an @postgresql.org list".

>> Because some members of the community have a conflict of interest, I'm
>> not certain we can have a certification endorsed by "the whole community".
>
> Depends on what you call "endorsed". Nobody expects us to say this is the one
> and only.

I'm just saying that asking the EDB staff to endorse a certification
which competes with EDB's certification is not something I personally
would do.

>
>> I would be willing to review the test questions (and suggest some), as
>> well as reviewing overall coverage.
>
> Ok, thanks. BTW we're not talking questions here, but tasks to be performed.

Oh, does LF have the ability to administer that kind of test?  That
would be awesome.

>> However, the first question we should have with this is "what problem
>> are we solving?"
>>
>> That is, are the EnterpriseDB/SRA/etc. certifications not good enough?
>
> At the very least they are not vendor neutral.
>
>> to make money off PostgreSQL.  If there is a deficiency, we need to make
>> sure that an LF certification will address that specific deficiency.
>
> Again, by its very setup I think it solves the major problem.

You haven't said what that problem is?

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

> On 10/30/2015 12:41 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
>>> I think this should be a closed list run by the Linux Foundation.
>>
>> Why's that? I'm willing to put up a list we can use for discussion.
>
> That's also fine.  I just mean "not an @postgresql.org list".
>
>>> Because some members of the community have a conflict of interest, I'm
>>> not certain we can have a certification endorsed by "the whole
>>> community".
>>
>> Depends on what you call "endorsed". Nobody expects us to say this is
>> the one
>> and only.
>
> I'm just saying that asking the EDB staff to endorse a certification
> which competes with EDB's certification is not something I personally
> would do.
>
>>
>>> I would be willing to review the test questions (and suggest some), as
>>> well as reviewing overall coverage.
>>
>> Ok, thanks. BTW we're not talking questions here, but tasks to be
>> performed.
>
> Oh, does LF have the ability to administer that kind of test?  That
> would be awesome.
>
>>> However, the first question we should have with this is "what problem
>>> are we solving?"
>>>
>>> That is, are the EnterpriseDB/SRA/etc. certifications not good enough?
>>
>> At the very least they are not vendor neutral.
>>
>>> to make money off PostgreSQL.  If there is a deficiency, we need to
>>> make
>>> sure that an LF certification will address that specific deficiency.
>>
>> Again, by its very setup I think it solves the major problem.
>
> You haven't said what that problem is?

I guess that is related to the practice of proprietary software world.


Saludos,
Gilberto Castillo
ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba

>>> Because some members of the community have a conflict of interest, I'm
>>> not certain we can have a certification endorsed by "the whole community".
>>
>> Depends on what you call "endorsed". Nobody expects us to say this is the one
>> and only.
>
> I'm just saying that asking the EDB staff to endorse a certification
> which competes with EDB's certification is not something I personally
> would do.
>

You seem to imply that EDB does not want a community-backed certification. Is it based on facts or are you assuming
whatthey think ? I'm just curious because I don't see where's the problem 

I don't know exactly how the Linux Foundation works, but it looks like Red Hat and SUSE are active members of the
foundationand they both deliver their own certification too.  

The situation here is quite similar. EDB is an important member of our community but there's enough room for their own
certificationand a community-backed one. 

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> I'm just saying that asking the EDB staff to endorse a certification
> which competes with EDB's certification is not something I personally
> would do.

I think the difficult that we're likely to run into doing this as a
community project is that coming up with a certification program
involves somebody making decisions as to what material will be
included in the certification and what material will not.  Generally,
if you have 5 community members, they will have 6 opinions on any
given topic, so getting cross-company agreement on exactly what should
be part of a certification exam sounds hard.  If the content of that
exam is known in detail to some companies and not others, those
companies have a major advantage in preparing a training curriculum
that will let people pass the exam.  If the content of the exam is
totally public, it won't be a very meaningful exam because anybody who
likes can look up all the answers in advance.  Also, somebody probably
will post an answer key on the Internet.  Now with a certification
class offered by a particular company, like EDB, the company matches
the certification exams to the training class that company offers.  If
somebody is certified by EDB, then it's up to whoever sees that to
judge whether that certification actually has any value to them, but
at least you know it probably matches up with the training curriculum
EDB offers.

Disclaimer: I don't have any involvement with either the EDB training
curriculum or the EDB certification stuff.  If there's a community
consensus around how to actually go forward with this, I'll certainly
try to figure out who here is doing that stuff and talk to them about
it.  The above paragraph is merely my personal view on why that may be
hard.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 12:41 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> >> I think this should be a closed list run by the Linux Foundation.
> >
> > Why's that? I'm willing to put up a list we can use for discussion.
>
> That's also fine.  I just mean "not an @postgresql.org list".

Which still doesn't explain why you don't want it on postgresql.org.

> I'm just saying that asking the EDB staff to endorse a certification
> which competes with EDB's certification is not something I personally
> would do.

Since, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you're not with EDB I wonder how
you come to this conclusion. I had a different feedback when talking to some
directly.

> > Ok, thanks. BTW we're not talking questions here, but tasks to be
> > performed.
> Oh, does LF have the ability to administer that kind of test?  That
> would be awesome.

Yes, they do.

> >> However, the first question we should have with this is "what problem
> >> are we solving?"
> >>
> >> That is, are the EnterpriseDB/SRA/etc. certifications not good enough?
> >
> > At the very least they are not vendor neutral.
> >
> >> to make money off PostgreSQL.  If there is a deficiency, we need to make
> >> sure that an LF certification will address that specific deficiency.
> >
> > Again, by its very setup I think it solves the major problem.
>
> You haven't said what that problem is?

But I have, see above. Just to make it clear again, there is no certification
for PostgreSQL and PostgreSQL only with no company attached to it. It'd be
great to have something that independent from those commercial interests.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

Gilberto Castillo wrote:
> > You haven't said what that problem is?
>
> I guess that is related to the practice of proprietary software world.

This I do not understand. Before I answer I'd like to understand what you're
aiming at here.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

> I think the difficult that we're likely to run into doing this as a
> community project is that coming up with a certification program
> involves somebody making decisions as to what material will be
> included in the certification and what material will not.  Generally,
> if you have 5 community members, they will have 6 opinions on any
> given topic, so getting cross-company agreement on exactly what should
> be part of a certification exam sounds hard.  If the content of that

Why so we need cross-company agreement? Are those of us that work for one of
the PostgreSQL-related companies no longer community members and only allowed
to speak on behalf of their employer? Actually I'm pretty sure this is not
what you want to say Robert.

> exam is known in detail to some companies and not others, those
> companies have a major advantage in preparing a training curriculum
> that will let people pass the exam.  If the content of the exam is
> ...

They way the Linux Foundation handled the Linux certs, they also developed an
online training course. If they did the same for PostgreSQL the curriculum
would be public anyway. However, this does not take away the need for in-class
trainings run by companies, nor does it remove the need for special
certifications against some companies' products. But again, I wonder why we as
community discuss commercial details of some companies' business models.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

Hi there!

Le samedi 31 octobre 2015 à 09:57 +0100, Michael Meskes a écrit :
> But I have, see above. Just to make it clear again, there is no certification
> for PostgreSQL and PostgreSQL only with no company attached to it. It'd be
> great to have something that independent from those commercial interests.

I completely agree with Michael. And as Damien, among others wrote here,
lots of folks working for a PostgreSQL company would be very happy to
work on this community certification. And their bosses to, exactly like
we're all happy working on PostgreSQL itself or on PostgreSQL tools.

A community-driven certification for PostgreSQL itself would also lower
the work do to *and maintain* (1 major version per year, huh..) for all
company-driven certification: I think those companies would only
maintain special modules where their content differs from the community
one ?

So to me, the real interest of us *all* is having a community
certification, and this is has *also* a real commercial interest for
PostgreSQL companies.

Speaking as the Dalibo's CEO, I'd be glad our company invest time on
this project :-)


Cheers,


--
Jean-Paul Argudo

On 10/31/2015 01:57 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> I'm just saying that asking the EDB staff to endorse a certification
>> which competes with EDB's certification is not something I personally
>> would do.
>
> Since, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you're not with EDB I wonder how
> you come to this conclusion. I had a different feedback when talking to some
> directly.

I mean, I would not ask EDB staff to endorse a certification which
competes with their company's cert.  They might choose to do it or not,
but I wouldn't ask.

>>> Ok, thanks. BTW we're not talking questions here, but tasks to be
>>> performed.
>> Oh, does LF have the ability to administer that kind of test?  That
>> would be awesome.
>
> Yes, they do.

That's pretty cool.  That might be a reason on its own to create an LF
certification ... because it's *better* than what's currently available.
 Anyone know what the EDB cert is like?  I know that neither SRA nor
CertFirst do hands-on "fix this" tests.

>> You haven't said what that problem is?
>
> But I have, see above. Just to make it clear again, there is no certification
> for PostgreSQL and PostgreSQL only with no company attached to it. It'd be
> great to have something that independent from those commercial interests.

Personally, I've always seen certification as a commercial activity, so
I don't see the above as a problem on its own.  In fact, the opposite:
certification provides companies with another way to make money off
PostgreSQL which doesn't conflict with code contributions.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> wrote:
>> I think the difficult that we're likely to run into doing this as a
>> community project is that coming up with a certification program
>> involves somebody making decisions as to what material will be
>> included in the certification and what material will not.  Generally,
>> if you have 5 community members, they will have 6 opinions on any
>> given topic, so getting cross-company agreement on exactly what should
>> be part of a certification exam sounds hard.  If the content of that
>
> Why so we need cross-company agreement? Are those of us that work for one of
> the PostgreSQL-related companies no longer community members and only allowed
> to speak on behalf of their employer? Actually I'm pretty sure this is not
> what you want to say Robert.

I think you're reading something into what I wrote that wasn't really there.

>> exam is known in detail to some companies and not others, those
>> companies have a major advantage in preparing a training curriculum
>> that will let people pass the exam.  If the content of the exam is
>> ...
>
> They way the Linux Foundation handled the Linux certs, they also developed an
> online training course. If they did the same for PostgreSQL the curriculum
> would be public anyway.

How would they develop such a course, except with the help of
PostgreSQL community members?

> However, this does not take away the need for in-class
> trainings run by companies, nor does it remove the need for special
> certifications against some companies' products. But again, I wonder why we as
> community discuss commercial details of some companies' business models.

I am not sure that certification has much use apart from such
commercial details.  I would not personally be willing to spend time
developing curriculum for a certification unless somebody paid me to
do it.  And the only reason that I can imagine somebody paying me to
do it is if it increased the value of a training class which the
person or organization paying that money was also providing.

Now, it could be that I just need a better imagination.  However, in
my experience, curriculum development is a lot of work.  If it's done
for free, I think it's not likely to be high quality.  And if it's
high quality, I think it will be because people with experience in
both PostgreSQL and curriculum development got paid to spend a lot of
time creating it, and then more time updating it each time a new
release comes out.  I would be very happy if someone volunteered to do
all of that work on an ongoing basis for no money and then did a great
job.  I would be even happier if some company volunteered to fund that
work on an ongoing basis in a way that benefited not only that company
but the whole community.  Although I would be happy about those
outcomes, I do not think that they are likely.  We can seek volunteers
for small tasks, but for things that take really large chunks of time
people usually need to be paid.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

> Im not sure that certification has much use apart from such
> commercial details.  I would not personally be willing to spend time
> developing curriculum for a certification unless somebody paid me to
> do it.  And the only reason that I can imagine somebody paying me to
> do it is if it increased the value of a training class which the
> person or organization paying that money was also providing.
>
> Now, it could be that I just need a better imagination.  However, in
> my experience, curriculum development is a lot of work.  If it's done
> for free, I think it's not likely to be high quality.  And if it's
> high quality, I think it will be because people with experience in
> both PostgreSQL and curriculum development got paid to spend a lot of
> time creating it, and then more time updating it each time a new
> release comes out.  I would be very happy if someone volunteered to do
> all of that work on an ongoing basis for no money and then did a great
> job.  I would be even happier if some company volunteered to fund that
> work on an ongoing basis in a way that benefited not only that company
> but the whole community.  Although I would be happy about those
> outcomes, I do not think that they are likely.  We can seek volunteers
> for small tasks, but for things that take really large chunks of time
> people usually need to be paid.

The Cuba proposal

===================================
Abstract— Cuba is betting on business efficiency as a vital weapon to
tackle the current worldwide economic crisis. Today the work on
enterprises or entities is not conceived without the informatics
applications that help in processes, resources, products management and
decisions-making, increasing performance and efficiency; applications that
are supported, generally, by a database. Currently the brakes on growth in
the use of open source databases management for handling them, is the lack
of knowledge by Cuban specialists in handling these types of technologies.
The Cuban university, as being essential to the development of society,
should develop strategies to support the migration to open source software
and with it, the gradual use of technologies that generate no charges for
the use of proprietary technologies and to achieve the country
technological sovereignty. This article presents, in line with this
necessity, the results of the first edition of the diploma in PostgreSQL
databases technologies, tool for the training of specialists in the
correct use of databases technologies and solutions related to this
manager, and the immediate projections to it perfect accord to the country
needed.
====================================

This is ready


Saludos,
Gilberto Castillo
ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba

There is something I haven't seen in this discussion- a comparison of
certification types.  Julyanto commented, "1. There are many thousands
of  Question which is groups into same level of difficulties.
(weight)"

This is not always the case.  The certifications that are really worth
something- RedHat's RHCE and I believe some Cisco certs- do not base
their certification on correct answers to questions.

Here's what I've heard about RedHat.  When you go to take the RHCE
exam, they sit you in front of a computer with a real OS install.
Then they tell you, "Something is broken with this system; also,
Services A, B, and C need to be installed and configured properly.
You need to fix all of the problems and install the services.  You
have 3 hours and you can use any resource at your disposal except for
Internet.  GO!"  This type of exam is difficult or impossible to do a
brain-dump for.  They make the issues so complex that you really have
to know your stuff *and be able to think and use that information* in
order to pass.

I think a Postgres certification should be like that- action based
rather than recall based.

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:10 PM, julyanto SUTANDANG
<julyanto@equnix.co.id> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Please allow me to share my ideas, I have been following this discussion and
> very interested since beginning..
> First of all, let think that PostgreSQL even it is open source is playing
> major role in Business and even mission critical apps which involved
> potential risk of human lives.
> So, PostgreSQL can be considered as serious business in a way.
>
> In the other hand, yes. Certification sometimes look as low, business
> oriented, etc. BUT, this is the first impression and the countable one
> record on paper which can be rely on by some people which want to use Our
> Expertise, Our skill, and our experience. Anyway, as serious business,
> PostgreSQL needs to have it, in  order to filter out incapable person which
> potentially creates PostgreSQL a bad name, or even risks lives.
> In my imagination, Certification process is:
> 1. There are many thousands of  Question which is groups into same level of
> difficulties. (weight)
> 2. Every question is multiple choices but the answer is very similar.
> 3. Question conducts in online, random questions and random position of the
> mutliple choices.
> 4. Number of Question per session is about one fifth of the all test in a
> test bank.
> 4. That is the first level of Ceritification, the Second level perhaps
> should be done in Class/Labs Hands On.
> 5. Even the first Level, but there are some Basic, Intermediate and Advanced
> one.
>
> In Certification business, usually there are 2 institution involved. One is
> the Test Maintainer, and the Second is Test Conductor which is who actually
> implement and operate the test. And in the ecosystem, we would have many
> institution which offers training, and etc to help ppl can pass the test
> well. The Test Maintainer is also doing reviews of the Test Bank, and did
> revision in times. Test Conductor can be done automatically but still there
> are some ppl operates and maintains. We can and we should charge ppl which
> did the test, and any institution which conduct training can be registered
> as the Partner of the Test Maintainer, and paid some amount yearly.
> Test Maintainer is the Comitee which consist of groups of ppl which
> dedicated for this. Any of the money raised from this business will goes to
> maintain PostgreSQL Global Development Group and the Test Maintainer (also
> test Conductor)
>
> We are a not talking about business here, but we are talking about
> PostgreSQL, and PostgreSQL is business thing, we should keep it good and
> professional. Having certification ecosystem is one thing that we can make
> to help community outside off developers (which is business community), and
> also help PostgreSQL itself maintained by great and capable person.
>
> Let's have a Test Maintainer Commitee, this should be filled by some
> PostgreSQL Hackers, Gurus, etc. That is peak, that is the summit.
>
> EDB's Cert in a way (especially in ASEAN), may be because they lack of
> knowlegde, considered by some ppl as the commercial part of PostgreSQL. This
> kind of perception borrows from others kind of business model, such as
> jboss, jaspersoft, etc (which actually commercial but declare as open source
> to gain more marketing side from word of mouth), and really not true for
> PostgreSQL.
>
> Well, that only ideas and proposal, any input?
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
>> wrote:
>> >> I think the difficult that we're likely to run into doing this as a
>> >> community project is that coming up with a certification program
>> >> involves somebody making decisions as to what material will be
>> >> included in the certification and what material will not.  Generally,
>> >> if you have 5 community members, they will have 6 opinions on any
>> >> given topic, so getting cross-company agreement on exactly what should
>> >> be part of a certification exam sounds hard.  If the content of that
>> >
>> > Why so we need cross-company agreement? Are those of us that work for
>> > one of
>> > the PostgreSQL-related companies no longer community members and only
>> > allowed
>> > to speak on behalf of their employer? Actually I'm pretty sure this is
>> > not
>> > what you want to say Robert.
>>
>> I think you're reading something into what I wrote that wasn't really
>> there.
>>
>> >> exam is known in detail to some companies and not others, those
>> >> companies have a major advantage in preparing a training curriculum
>> >> that will let people pass the exam.  If the content of the exam is
>> >> ...
>> >
>> > They way the Linux Foundation handled the Linux certs, they also
>> > developed an
>> > online training course. If they did the same for PostgreSQL the
>> > curriculum
>> > would be public anyway.
>>
>> How would they develop such a course, except with the help of
>> PostgreSQL community members?
>>
>> > However, this does not take away the need for in-class
>> > trainings run by companies, nor does it remove the need for special
>> > certifications against some companies' products. But again, I wonder why
>> > we as
>> > community discuss commercial details of some companies' business models.
>>
>> I am not sure that certification has much use apart from such
>> commercial details.  I would not personally be willing to spend time
>> developing curriculum for a certification unless somebody paid me to
>> do it.  And the only reason that I can imagine somebody paying me to
>> do it is if it increased the value of a training class which the
>> person or organization paying that money was also providing.
>>
>> Now, it could be that I just need a better imagination.  However, in
>> my experience, curriculum development is a lot of work.  If it's done
>> for free, I think it's not likely to be high quality.  And if it's
>> high quality, I think it will be because people with experience in
>> both PostgreSQL and curriculum development got paid to spend a lot of
>> time creating it, and then more time updating it each time a new
>> release comes out.  I would be very happy if someone volunteered to do
>> all of that work on an ongoing basis for no money and then did a great
>> job.  I would be even happier if some company volunteered to fund that
>> work on an ongoing basis in a way that benefited not only that company
>> but the whole community.  Although I would be happy about those
>> outcomes, I do not think that they are likely.  We can seek volunteers
>> for small tasks, but for things that take really large chunks of time
>> people usually need to be paid.
>>
>> --
>> Robert Haas
>> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Julyanto SUTANDANG
>
> Equnix Business Solutions, PT
> (An Open Source an Open Mind Company)
>
> Pusat Niaga ITC Roxy Mas Blok C2/42.  Jl. KH Hasyim Ashari 125, Jakarta
> Pusat
> T: +6221 7997 692 F: +62216315281 M: +628164858028
>
>
> Caution: The information enclosed in this email (and any attachments) may be
> legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use of
> the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or otherwise
> reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by any
> individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
> message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the taking
> of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify
> the sender and delete this message.Unless it is made by the authorized
> person, any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of PT Equnix Business
> Solutions.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am 03.11.2015 um 15:45 schrieb Joshua Kramer:
> There is something I haven't seen in this discussion- a comparison
> of certification types.  Julyanto commented, "1. There are many
> thousands of  Question which is groups into same level of
> difficulties. (weight)"
>
> This is not always the case.  The certifications that are really
> worth something- RedHat's RHCE and I believe some Cisco certs- do
> not base their certification on correct answers to questions.
>
> Here's what I've heard about RedHat.  When you go to take the RHCE
> exam, they sit you in front of a computer with a real OS install.
> Then they tell you, "Something is broken with this system; also,
> Services A, B, and C need to be installed and configured properly.
> You need to fix all of the problems and install the services.  You
> have 3 hours and you can use any resource at your disposal except
> for Internet.  GO!"  This type of exam is difficult or impossible
> to do a brain-dump for.  They make the issues so complex that you
> really have to know your stuff *and be able to think and use that
> information* in order to pass.
>
> I think a Postgres certification should be like that- action based
> rather than recall based.

As far as I understood, what Michael initially suggested was such a
kind of "hands-on" certification, as the LF does it that way.

+1 for that btw (being one of the first RHCEs ;-).
- --
Gunnar "Nick" Bluth
RHCE/SCLA

Mobil +49 172 8853339
Email: gunnar.bluth@pro-open.de
_____________________________________________________________
In 1984 mainstream users were choosing VMS over UNIX.
Ten years later they are choosing Windows over UNIX.
What part of that message aren't you getting? - Tom Payne

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWOMsEAAoJEBAQrmsyiTOM3GYH/3Z4UeuJjahGQaB+zhmXTSpE
lA5XjEs5TlLFhdGGCYxzMGfeEcC/rzwzErwR7N4yszs78CxwNq7AvaPOcLN768lD
KpGvKkHJLKS0eoDDMq1op0UTLK7svvsoeVcLg/EGNhedCrQ7jlp1/jdshPEXJddl
qmQGSOuwTX34lUwNHRE3wT4DfwhXLPrdPtC40g8SIgSWq+7qUf9koMF8iTt7TXVI
Biu8PcvFu71bkqePs8xV8G+KoBjCJ/iDNL7F951+PHunfP2MnveGS0evNiqbxQF7
8lme6bu8JtxemECtIZOXvzx6EfTQEsRc19NFRajaKejsec1wlkGmk5nCReIpdsk=
=pprk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

The views expressed below are my own and personal...

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, 10:45 PM Joshua Kramer <joskra42.list@gmail.com> wrote:

There is something I haven't seen in this discussion- a comparison of
certification types.  Julyanto commented, "1. There are many thousands
of  Question which is groups into same level of difficulties.
(weight)"

This is not always the case.  The certifications that are really worth
something- RedHat's RHCE and I believe some Cisco certs- do not base
their certification on correct answers to questions.

Here's what I've heard about RedHat.  When you go to take the RHCE
exam, they sit you in front of a computer with a real OS install.
Then they tell you, "Something is broken with this system; also,
Services A, B, and C need to be installed and configured properly.
You need to fix all of the problems and install the services.  You
have 3 hours and you can use any resource at your disposal except for
Internet.  GO!"  This type of exam is difficult or impossible to do a
brain-dump for.  They make the issues so complex that you really have
to know your stuff *and be able to think and use that information* in
order to pass.

Unless you plan to have a new set of scenarios every month, it is pretty much possible to have a brain dump for this as well. And at the same time people/organization designing it will have an upper edge in offering a training customized to help candidates pass the kind of scenarios thrown to them. Oracle's OCP and OCM has such procedures for one to attain a certificate and I have interviewed OCPs who can not differentiate Redo Log and Undo Tablespace very well. What I am trying to say is its very difficult to get over the curse of brain dumps.

I agree with Josh and much more strongly with Robert Hass about the content design, advocacy and quality questions and mode of examination.

I think a Postgres certification should be like that- action based
rather than recall based.

I guess before we think about certification in line with LF, I think we all must see what is the problem we are trying to address?
I believe rather than introducing certifications what might make more sense is to introduce PostgreSQL as a platform for teaching RDBMS in graduation schools. Today most of the colleges (in India and ASEAN) which I know about uses Oracle as an example to Teach RDBMS. I believe that you need to have ample resources at various levels (associate, pro, adv ) to roll out a proper certification matrix and also a much larger adoption. While certification will certainly push for more resources available, it is not much useful without training program (like what Robert pointed out).

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:10 PM, julyanto SUTANDANG
<julyanto@equnix.co.id> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Please allow me to share my ideas, I have been following this discussion and
> very interested since beginning..
> First of all, let think that PostgreSQL even it is open source is playing
> major role in Business and even mission critical apps which involved
> potential risk of human lives.
> So, PostgreSQL can be considered as serious business in a way.
>
> In the other hand, yes. Certification sometimes look as low, business
> oriented, etc. BUT, this is the first impression and the countable one
> record on paper which can be rely on by some people which want to use Our
> Expertise, Our skill, and our experience. Anyway, as serious business,
> PostgreSQL needs to have it, in  order to filter out incapable person which
> potentially creates PostgreSQL a bad name, or even risks lives.
> In my imagination, Certification process is:
> 1. There are many thousands of  Question which is groups into same level of
> difficulties. (weight)
> 2. Every question is multiple choices but the answer is very similar.
> 3. Question conducts in online, random questions and random position of the
> mutliple choices.
> 4. Number of Question per session is about one fifth of the all test in a
> test bank.
> 4. That is the first level of Ceritification, the Second level perhaps
> should be done in Class/Labs Hands On.
> 5. Even the first Level, but there are some Basic, Intermediate and Advanced
> one.
>
> In Certification business, usually there are 2 institution involved. One is
> the Test Maintainer, and the Second is Test Conductor which is who actually
> implement and operate the test. And in the ecosystem, we would have many
> institution which offers training, and etc to help ppl can pass the test
> well. The Test Maintainer is also doing reviews of the Test Bank, and did
> revision in times. Test Conductor can be done automatically but still there
> are some ppl operates and maintains. We can and we should charge ppl which
> did the test, and any institution which conduct training can be registered
> as the Partner of the Test Maintainer, and paid some amount yearly.
> Test Maintainer is the Comitee which consist of groups of ppl which
> dedicated for this. Any of the money raised from this business will goes to
> maintain PostgreSQL Global Development Group and the Test Maintainer (also
> test Conductor)
>
> We are a not talking about business here, but we are talking about
> PostgreSQL, and PostgreSQL is business thing, we should keep it good and
> professional. Having certification ecosystem is one thing that we can make
> to help community outside off developers (which is business community), and
> also help PostgreSQL itself maintained by great and capable person.
>
> Let's have a Test Maintainer Commitee, this should be filled by some
> PostgreSQL Hackers, Gurus, etc. That is peak, that is the summit.
>
> EDB's Cert in a way (especially in ASEAN), may be because they lack of
> knowlegde, considered by some ppl as the commercial part of PostgreSQL. This
> kind of perception borrows from others kind of business model, such as
> jboss, jaspersoft, etc (which actually commercial but declare as open source
> to gain more marketing side from word of mouth), and really not true for
> PostgreSQL.

I don't agree to this entirely. But I am afraid that my views would be seen as biased.

PS:  My employers are EDB partner and I am a trainer myself I will keep my views restricted.

>
> Well, that only ideas and proposal, any input?
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
>> wrote:
>> >> I think the difficult that we're likely to run into doing this as a
>> >> community project is that coming up with a certification program
>> >> involves somebody making decisions as to what material will be
>> >> included in the certification and what material will not.  Generally,
>> >> if you have 5 community members, they will have 6 opinions on any
>> >> given topic, so getting cross-company agreement on exactly what should
>> >> be part of a certification exam sounds hard.  If the content of that
>> >
>> > Why so we need cross-company agreement? Are those of us that work for
>> > one of
>> > the PostgreSQL-related companies no longer community members and only
>> > allowed
>> > to speak on behalf of their employer? Actually I'm pretty sure this is
>> > not
>> > what you want to say Robert.
>>
>> I think you're reading something into what I wrote that wasn't really
>> there.
>>
>> >> exam is known in detail to some companies and not others, those
>> >> companies have a major advantage in preparing a training curriculum
>> >> that will let people pass the exam.  If the content of the exam is
>> >> ...
>> >
>> > They way the Linux Foundation handled the Linux certs, they also
>> > developed an
>> > online training course. If they did the same for PostgreSQL the
>> > curriculum
>> > would be public anyway.
>>
>> How would they develop such a course, except with the help of
>> PostgreSQL community members?
>>
>> > However, this does not take away the need for in-class
>> > trainings run by companies, nor does it remove the need for special
>> > certifications against some companies' products. But again, I wonder why
>> > we as
>> > community discuss commercial details of some companies' business models.
>>
>> I am not sure that certification has much use apart from such
>> commercial details.  I would not personally be willing to spend time
>> developing curriculum for a certification unless somebody paid me to
>> do it.  And the only reason that I can imagine somebody paying me to
>> do it is if it increased the value of a training class which the
>> person or organization paying that money was also providing.
>>
>> Now, it could be that I just need a better imagination.  However, in
>> my experience, curriculum development is a lot of work.  If it's done
>> for free, I think it's not likely to be high quality.  And if it's
>> high quality, I think it will be because people with experience in
>> both PostgreSQL and curriculum development got paid to spend a lot of
>> time creating it, and then more time updating it each time a new
>> release comes out.  I would be very happy if someone volunteered to do
>> all of that work on an ongoing basis for no money and then did a great
>> job.  I would be even happier if some company volunteered to fund that
>> work on an ongoing basis in a way that benefited not only that company
>> but the whole community.  Although I would be happy about those
>> outcomes, I do not think that they are likely.  We can seek volunteers
>> for small tasks, but for things that take really large chunks of time
>> people usually need to be paid.
>>
>> --
>> Robert Haas
>> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Julyanto SUTANDANG
>
> Equnix Business Solutions, PT
> (An Open Source an Open Mind Company)
>
> Pusat Niaga ITC Roxy Mas Blok C2/42.  Jl. KH Hasyim Ashari 125, Jakarta
> Pusat
> T: +6221 7997 692 F: +62216315281 M: +628164858028
>
>
> Caution: The information enclosed in this email (and any attachments) may be
> legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use of
> the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or otherwise
> reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by any
> individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
> message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the taking
> of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify
> the sender and delete this message.Unless it is made by the authorized
> person, any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of PT Equnix Business
> Solutions.

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy

On 29 October 2015 at 04:43, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as you may already know roughly a year ago the Linux Foundation has started
> offering vendor neutral and even distribution agnostic certifications for
> Linux sysadmins and engineers
> (https://training.linuxfoundation.org/certification).  I mentioned to them
> that in my opinion this is something that the PostgreSQL world would need as
> well and they expressed an interest in developing one. But they don't want to
> do it without community involvement.
>
> Therefore I'd like to assemble a group here that has an interest in this topic
> to discuss and figure out the details. Who'd be interested?
>

me.
sorry to join late to the party :)

btw, are you aware that we tried this once? one of the problems was
that by the time we finish the first part we knew next version changed
everything (i don't remember the details only the bad taste).

--
Jaime Casanova                      www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación

On 29 October 2015 at 08:52, Bob Lunney <bobl@aweber.com> wrote:
> Ah,  the old "certification" fallacy!
>

while i agree a certification doesn't say much... i also know that
people is continously asking me for certified people or
certifications...

>
> However, for those who live in that sad world where certifications are a minimum entry level requirement, a
certificationcreated by community consensus makes sense, so long as the criteria for certification are open and public. 
>

ah! you mean like me? yeah, it make sense in this isolated part of the world :)

--
Jaime Casanova                      www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación

> On 29 October 2015 at 04:43, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> as you may already know roughly a year ago the Linux Foundation has
>> started
>> offering vendor neutral and even distribution agnostic certifications
>> for
>> Linux sysadmins and engineers
>> (https://training.linuxfoundation.org/certification).  I mentioned to
>> them
>> that in my opinion this is something that the PostgreSQL world would
>> need as
>> well and they expressed an interest in developing one. But they don't
>> want to
>> do it without community involvement.
>>
>> Therefore I'd like to assemble a group here that has an interest in this
>> topic
>> to discuss and figure out the details. Who'd be interested?
>>
>
> me.
> sorry to join late to the party :)
>
> btw, are you aware that we tried this once? one of the problems was
> that by the time we finish the first part we knew next version changed
> everything (i don't remember the details only the bad taste).
>

Remenber the Diploma In Cuba about of Postgresql


Saludos,
Gilberto Castillo
ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba

Robert Haas wrote:
> I think you're reading something into what I wrote that wasn't really there.

Great to hear. As you can see from my question I didn't really believe my
interpretation myself. Thanks for clarifying.

> How would they develop such a course, except with the help of
> PostgreSQL community members?

Right, they need somebody who knows PostgreSQL good enough. I'll grant you
that. However, that somebody does not necessarily have be involved with the
community.

> I am not sure that certification has much use apart from such
> commercial details.  I would not personally be willing to spend time
> developing curriculum for a certification unless somebody paid me to
> do it.  And the only reason that I can imagine somebody paying me to
> do it is if it increased the value of a training class which the
> person or organization paying that money was also providing.

Fair enough.

> Now, it could be that I just need a better imagination.  However, in
> my experience, curriculum development is a lot of work.  If it's done
> for free, I think it's not likely to be high quality.  And if it's
> high quality, I think it will be because people with experience in
> both PostgreSQL and curriculum development got paid to spend a lot of
> time creating it, and then more time updating it each time a new
> release comes out.  I would be very happy if someone volunteered to do
> all of that work on an ongoing basis for no money and then did a great
> job.  I would be even happier if some company volunteered to fund that
> work on an ongoing basis in a way that benefited not only that company
> but the whole community.  Although I would be happy about those

This is exactly what the Linux Foundation  seems to be offering, is it not?

> outcomes, I do not think that they are likely.  We can seek volunteers
> for small tasks, but for things that take really large chunks of time
> people usually need to be paid.

Nobody expects us to do anything but in a sense endorse it.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

> This is not always the case.  The certifications that are really worth
> something- RedHat's RHCE and I believe some Cisco certs- do not base
> their certification on correct answers to questions.
>
> Here's what I've heard about RedHat.  When you go to take the RHCE
> exam, they sit you in front of a computer with a real OS install.
> Then they tell you, "Something is broken with this system; also,
> Services A, B, and C need to be installed and configured properly.
> You need to fix all of the problems and install the services.  You
> have 3 hours and you can use any resource at your disposal except for
> Internet.  GO!"  This type of exam is difficult or impossible to do a
> brain-dump for.  They make the issues so complex that you really have
> to know your stuff *and be able to think and use that information* in
> order to pass.
>
> I think a Postgres certification should be like that- action based
> rather than recall based.

Which is exactly what we're talking about here.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

> I guess before we think about certification in line with LF, I think we all
> must see what is the problem we are trying to address?

Maybe we could bring this discussion back to what it was about originally.
Nobody asked us to develop a certification. This thread is about the LF
(amybe) willing to create one and about them wanting to work with us, so that
they create something the PostgreSQL project likes as well.

> I believe rather than introducing certifications what might make more sense
> is to introduce PostgreSQL as a platform for teaching RDBMS in graduation
> schools. Today most of the colleges (in India and ASEAN) which I know about
> uses Oracle as an example to Teach RDBMS. I believe that you need to have
> ample resources at various levels (associate, pro, adv ) to roll out a
> proper certification matrix and also a much larger adoption. While
> certification will certainly push for more resources available, it is not
> much useful without training program (like what Robert pointed out).

AFAICT their certifications so far all contain web based training as well.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

> Remenber the Diploma In Cuba about of Postgresql

Let me use this to point out that I personally would love to have a section on
our website that lists all available certifications for PostgreSQL. This
discussion is not about one certification by the PostgreSQL community, I
sincerely doubt we could ever get one.

With FOSS being about choice, why not a choice of certifications?

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

I'm going to create a small and private mailing list solely for the discussion
with the Linux Foundation about their potential certification. For those
interested, please drop me a note with the address you'd like to be subscribed
with.

All other certification discussion can stay year, if you ask me.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 03:09:38PM +0000, Sameer Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 5:44 AM Jaime Casanova <
> jaime.casanova@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> > On 29 October 2015 at 08:52, Bob Lunney <bobl@aweber.com> wrote:
> > > Ah,  the old "certification" fallacy!
> > >
> >
> > while i agree a certification doesn't say much... i also know that
> > people is continously asking me for certified people or
> > certifications...
> >
> >
> Yes, I get similar request whenever we take up a new project. Because they
> think certified professionals can deliver a project very well. I don't
> blame them. Here in ASEAN (specially in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand) I
> have seen botched-up implementation by self-claimed experts/freelancer for
> PostgreSQL.

If you think it's different elsewhere, I have bad news, or good news,
if knowing you're not alone in this situation makes you feel better.
People who engage these people without checking references and doing
their own due diligence are taking risks.

This would be true in the presence of a certification as well.

I'm not against making another certification program, but let's be
very realistic about what such a program could and could not do.

Complete or even plausible protection against incompetence and malice
aforethought is NOT among the things a certification could accomplish,
and you would be doing a disservice to the idea by selling it as that.

Even assuming a rigorous, task-based test with good fuzzing and
frequent updates, I see no proposals on the table for ensuring that
the person who takes the test is the same one who presents the
credential.  Any such proposal simply starts a technology war between
people wanting such credentials without being qualified and that
system.

Then there's the question of retention.  Performing well on an
examination one day (or week, or however long it takes) is not the
same as long-term mastery of the subject.  A person can, and many
students do, cram for a test, do well on it, and fail utterly to apply
the knowledge three weeks later, let alone three years.

> Earlier someone mentioned about the non-popularity of EDB certification in
> ASEAN.  I am not sure of history, but in recent past (24-30months time) we
> have seen a lot of people taking up EDB's PostgreSQL training and
> certification. This has gone hand-in-hand with higher adoption of
> PostgreSQL and EDB in ASEAN. And as more organisation take up PosgreSQL
> more people will take up certification exams. Even professional look up to
> certification as a value add in their resume and so certification authority
> should really check their merit before awarding it.
> Also I have seen cases of large BFSI and telecom segment customers where
> they want to make sure that they have certified staff before promoting a
> new technology to be used for critical system. This is again where I have
> seen learning path/training and certification plays an important role.

I'm curious about situations you've seen that involve free software,
especially software where there isn't an authoritative vendor.  It's
one thing to certify on, say, Red Hat.  It's a very different thing to
certify on Linux as a whole, a situation much more comparable to the
PostgreSQL one.

> I feel while certifications are really important both to back the adoption
> and also to promote more adoption, it has to be backed by a proper training
> or learning path. At the same time a lot of effort has to be spent in
> maintaining the level of scrutiny of skills.
>
>
> *Disclaimer:* My employer is a training partner and master partner to EDB
> and I am myself a certified trainer. My opinion is my own but is based on
> the experience of delivering training to about 150-200 candidates during
> more than 15 training sessions in last 2-2.5 years of time.

As Josh mentioned, training is a business, and if you do it right, you
can do a lot of good with it as a business.  I'm not seeing a
compelling argument here for having the PostgreSQL project itself
divert scarce resources toward supporting this business, though.
Getting awesome new software out the door each year is already
stretching those resources thin.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015, 2:58 AM David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:

On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 03:09:38PM +0000, Sameer Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 5:44 AM Jaime Casanova <
> jaime.casanova@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> > On 29 October 2015 at 08:52, Bob Lunney <bobl@aweber.com> wrote:
> > > Ah,  the old "certification" fallacy!
> > >
> >
> > while i agree a certification doesn't say much... i also know that
> > people is continously asking me for certified people or
> > certifications...
> >
> >
> Yes, I get similar request whenever we take up a new project. Because they
> think certified professionals can deliver a project very well. I don't
> blame them. Here in ASEAN (specially in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand) I
> have seen botched-up implementation by self-claimed experts/freelancer for
> PostgreSQL.

If you think it's different elsewhere, I have bad news, or good news,
if knowing you're not alone in this situation makes you feel better.
People who engage these people without checking references and doing
their own due diligence are taking risks.

This would be true in the presence of a certification as well.

I'm not against making another certification program, but let's be
very realistic about what such a program could and could not do.

Complete or even plausible protection against incompetence and malice
aforethought is NOT among the things a certification could accomplish,
and you would be doing a disservice to the idea by selling it as that.

Even assuming a rigorous, task-based test with good fuzzing and
frequent updates, I see no proposals on the table for ensuring that
the person who takes the test is the same one who presents the
credential.  Any such proposal simply starts a technology war between
people wanting such credentials without being qualified and that
system.

Then there's the question of retention.  Performing well on an
examination one day (or week, or however long it takes) is not the
same as long-term mastery of the subject.  A person can, and many
students do, cram for a test, do well on it, and fail utterly to apply
the knowledge three weeks later, let alone three years.

> Earlier someone mentioned about the non-popularity of EDB certification in
> ASEAN.  I am not sure of history, but in recent past (24-30months time) we
> have seen a lot of people taking up EDB's PostgreSQL training and
> certification. This has gone hand-in-hand with higher adoption of
> PostgreSQL and EDB in ASEAN. And as more organisation take up PosgreSQL
> more people will take up certification exams. Even professional look up to
> certification as a value add in their resume and so certification authority
> should really check their merit before awarding it.
> Also I have seen cases of large BFSI and telecom segment customers where
> they want to make sure that they have certified staff before promoting a
> new technology to be used for critical system. This is again where I have
> seen learning path/training and certification plays an important role.

I'm curious about situations you've seen that involve free software,
especially software where there isn't an authoritative vendor.  It's
one thing to certify on, say, Red Hat.  It's a very different thing to
certify on Linux as a whole, a situation much more comparable to the
PostgreSQL one.

I am saying that any training needs to be backed by a learning path or curriculum. This is where training comes in. Candidates who would want to apply for certification should know what are they going to be tested for. The learning path prepared then for it. Saying you will be tested against "Performance Tuning" skills is open ended. That is where a proper training or a learning path in form of some guide book can be helpful. The learning path has to make sure that it does not end up being a formal education session / textbook. I feel this necessity would be there for any technology certification free or not. That's is what I pointed out as a "good" about EDB certification backed by a learning path.

Even if I as an Organization decide to opt for Postgres for some critical project I would want my DBA to kwarn and prove that he can take care of this DB. This is again where certification and what is that DBA certified against helps.

> I feel while certifications are really important both to back the adoption
> and also to promote more adoption, it has to be backed by a proper training
> or learning path. At the same time a lot of effort has to be spent in
> maintaining the level of scrutiny of skills.
>
>
> *Disclaimer:* My employer is a training partner and master partner to EDB
> and I am myself a certified trainer. My opinion is my own but is based on
> the experience of delivering training to about 150-200 candidates during
> more than 15 training sessions in last 2-2.5 years of time.

As Josh mentioned, training is a business, and if you do it right, you
can do a lot of good with it as a business.  I'm not seeing a
compelling argument here for having the PostgreSQL project itself
divert scarce resources toward supporting this business, though.
Getting awesome new software out the door each year is already
stretching those resources thin.

May be I chose different words to describe what would be needed but I too had the same reasoning that it will be difficult for Community to take it up (certification and training) given what it needs. It would be upto individuals to take it up in their own personal capacity or upto commercial entities to drive it.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

On 11/04/2015 08:10 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I'm going to create a small and private mailing list solely for the discussion
> with the Linux Foundation about their potential certification. For those
> interested, please drop me a note with the address you'd like to be subscribed
> with.
>
> All other certification discussion can stay year, if you ask me.

Sounds good, please add me.


--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

> On 11/04/2015 08:10 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
>> I'm going to create a small and private mailing list solely for the
>> discussion
>> with the Linux Foundation about their potential certification. For those
>> interested, please drop me a note with the address you'd like to be
>> subscribed
>> with.
>>
>> All other certification discussion can stay year, if you ask me.
>
> Sounds good, please add me.

Excuse me, I can add?

Saludos,
Gilberto Castillo
ETECSA, La Habana, Cuba

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> wrote:
>> Now, it could be that I just need a better imagination.  However, in
>> my experience, curriculum development is a lot of work.  If it's done
>> for free, I think it's not likely to be high quality.  And if it's
>> high quality, I think it will be because people with experience in
>> both PostgreSQL and curriculum development got paid to spend a lot of
>> time creating it, and then more time updating it each time a new
>> release comes out.  I would be very happy if someone volunteered to do
>> all of that work on an ongoing basis for no money and then did a great
>> job.  I would be even happier if some company volunteered to fund that
>> work on an ongoing basis in a way that benefited not only that company
>> but the whole community.  Although I would be happy about those
>
> This is exactly what the Linux Foundation  seems to be offering, is it not?

No idea, but if they are, that's great.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company