I worked for several years at a semi-startup as a Database Engineer where my role was to guide developers in writing performant SQL (and writing indexes for them) and architect their schema to be inline with our future plans and various other database tasks (managing query plans, being an expert on the database feature set etc). I even created an internal course: SQL School, that I included the directors/customer support teams in.
To that specific company my role was priceless, new features could be built in 1/2 the time with an expert writing the queries and handling the database. My programmatic analysis of our 20 year old code base had 5000 unique queries and 3000 more when accounting for dynamic SQL. Not gonna lie it was a complete mess but if I didn't exist they would have needed a lot more database resources. It was a terrible code base and any plan to refactor and avoid this mess would still need my role to do the transition.
I loved that job but its extremely hard to transition to any other roles and nowadays its easier to use alternative solutions.
I've worked for a few of those fairly recently. I also worked for a place that was running on a fully custom codebase, no framework, php with all sql scattered through each page and all the devs using their individual machines to ssh into a central dev computer to work (tell people which file you're working on first). No version control of course.
This is an automatic fail for an employer. In interviews I ask, if it comes up I interrupt the discussion, verify, and if they truly develop without valid source control/revision control - I end the interview and inform the recruiter NFW and why.
is this DBA stuff though? Sounds like creating indexes would be basic junior-level backend dev knowledge?
Yes, it is or should be.
If you have a mission critical database with a lot of writing to it and the requirement of millisecond response times then every index you implement needs to be balanced against the cost of writing.
Like other database objects, i.e. constraints and triggers that's absolutely a DBA job.
The database was 10gb RDS with no indexes.
and we must note that the business side did eventually bring in external consultants because the project was clearly distressed. So it did eventually get corrected and I naturally tend to see the worse examples of this kind of thing, but yeah, it is possible to assemble a team of 8 developers and get unlucky such that not a single one knows anything about indexes or cloud databases in general.
But that’s turning out to be more and more untrue. Newer engineers really do not know.
The lazy stereotyping is inaccurate, caustic, and uncalled-for. I've worked with several bootcampers, and nearly all of them have been entirely capable.
Based on my anecdotes (I guess I am getting into drawing broad conclusions now), good bootcamps are a good way to turn someone into an entry-level engineer who's equipped to start contributing value and then learn more as they go. If they got hired immediately as a lead engineer and weren't ready for it (which they wouldn't be, if the bootcamp was their only experience), that's the company's problem.
I would add too that there's a huge gap in quality between the best and the worst bootcamps; there are some that consistently crank out totally capable junior engineers, but I've read horror stories about others that are outright scams. It's possible we need an accreditation process of some sort.
One Jr Dev won't take down the ship but a whole crew of Jr's with senior titles and authority will at least slow you down to a crawl. In recent years I've worked with teams who are largely made of bootcampers and Jr devs. As I've said from the start, I've been in startup land for a long time now and it's usually all about getting by on a shoestring. I fully understand the financial reasoning behind it, but I dont think the people running these companies have thought far enough ahead and I strongly doubt that any of the places I've worked in recent years will be around even 4 years from now.
Ah hah! Now we're getting to what could be the heart of the issue: short-term business practices, the incentives that drive them, and the market conditions that make it hard to find or afford the necessary technical leadership. This is a complex topic and out of scope, but it feels like a truer source of the problems you've witnessed.
> but from what I've seen, bootcamp alone does a really poor job producing people who know what they're doing... worse so than college because it's meant to be lightening fast education and job placement
It's fair to report that as your experience (even though my experience differs). The issue I took at the top of the thread was with broad, incendiary statements like this:
> small teams trying to support the whole stack with their javascript bootcamp training are the biggest reason so much tech is absolute garbage these days
This is a pile of tropes, capped off with a bold assertion. Bootcamps aren't even especially focused on JavaScript; the ones I'm familiar with also let students pick Python or Ruby for their projects, and also teach the basics of how to use a database and other technologies (of course they don't make you an expert at any of these things). But it was used here because "JavaScript" has become a stand-in in the context of Hacker News comment sections where people are complaining about perceived poor engineering practices. Like "bootcamps", it's come to paint a particular picture in people's heads of a particular kind of dev, whether or not the thing itself is directly relevant to the discussion at hand. Leaning on (and entrenching) these stereotypes is what I'm pushing back against. They aren't accurate, and they encourage certain devs to be disparaged for no good reason.
But good lord bootcamps do not produce much in the way of talent in my experience. I'm sure there are some shining stars that benefited, but I have yet to meet one of them. One guy I worked with fully admitted to me in private that he plagiarized his "final" for bootcamp which was a rather difficult algorithm. He just used some open source code he found on github and only slightly modified it. The code he wrote that I had to support was some of the worst spaghetti I've had to pick apart and fix and he was the lead engineer for the company.
These companies would make more money with proper talent. Code camps need to go away.
Bootcamps are like anything: you get out what you put in. They are a(n often effective!) way of learning a skill. If there's a problem, it's with tech hiring and its ability to accurately evaluate candidates. But that's an intrinsically hard task, and I don't know if there's a real solution (and the inaccuracy cuts both ways, and affects everyone, regardless of where they learned to code).
Stop inflating your own narrow experience and projecting it onto a huge swath of people. Pushing stereotypes is harmful.
the anecdote I offered above was not an effort to paint code camp participants as untrustworthy or incompetent. My point is that this individual was lacking in skills and knowledge beyond a Jr level engineer and plagiarized at least part of his codecamp work.
The only thing he needed codecamp for was the "education" on his resume and a shortcut through the interview process. He was made lead engineer, potentially just to boost his resume, but regardless he was involved in "fullstack" development which was leading to some really really nasty issues. He had already worked there for some time once I joined the team, so I have no idea how limited his skills or knowledge were when he joined. What I did see was that he took a codecamp shortcut. This is harder to do with college CS courses and totally pointless if you're doing it for the fun of learning and creating things in the first place (which is the motivation for my and many other people's self-education).
I've worked with self, college and bootcamp educated people. To reiterate I PERSONALLY have not encountered someone from bootcamp who was beyond Jr level. I'm sure there are people out there who are very talented and have used bootcamp education to their benefit, but I see it as an easy system to abuse and I'm skeptical over the actual educational benefits offered by these schools.
I would also like to add that I have worked for a number of companies who refuse to even look at a resume from people with codecamp education (hiring people who are self-educated over codecamp educated even). I think this is a heavy handed approach and disagree with it.
Regardless of the source of education, loading up your company with people who are only Jr to Mid level is a recipe for disaster.
heheh, I hear that all the time, but show me the money...
For instance we have the EV boom, and visibly a lot of companies are rushing in to try to make as much as they can without planning for what they would do if they become the next Toyota. But surely, some are planning a bit more ahead (or have a more long term viable approach, even if by accident), and time will tell who they are.
My glass half full view would be that we don't need most companies to succeed, as long as the well isn't poisoned.
Now, you don't need any of that. Yet, you can call yourself "full stack". No one truly full stack anymore.
But they wore lots hats. I worried it was a way to get H1B visas for software dev roles.
So they simply say, “We are not hiring for software developers, we are hiring for DBAs … totally different thing ;).”
So I hope you find from other people that this is still a good role to pursue and that you do become a dba and work as a specialist with highly skilled teams and make the code world a better place.