Some of the day to day things we do as database administrators are not completely understood by people that might be reviewing the change or auditing the changes. So, for them a rebuild of an index or analyzing statistics might not be as straight forward. And are these even considered changes in the databases and why would they need change controls around them? Well, even adding space to a tablespace could cause trouble on the database. It would have to be a really bad, but it is possible to mistype where a datafile is supposed to go or fill up a file system with the wrong size information (thank goodness for resize). Needless to say the things we do against the database even though minor can have impact on a system and maybe reviewed by a change board because of the process controls for compliance.
Now in going back and considering that someone reviewing a minor change may not have the information or experience about what that change does, and analyzing statistics could mean something very different in their world, why not provide them with some basic information. Instead of submitting a change, rebuild indexes and leaving it at that, state: Rebuilding indexes online to reduce fragmentation of the index space usage for better performance of the indexed data. This does not change any of the data within the table or index, just reorders it again for quicker access and this can occur while users are accessing the system. Or same with statistics, updating table statistics which provide Oracle the information about the table, such as row counts, how many distinct values, indexes and more information about the type of data to develop a good query plan to access the data as efficiently as possible.
Just a little more details about why and what is changing, and honestly makes the change a little less scary. It also provides information about data changes, which from a SOX perspective is very important if a task a DBA does is changing data. Now, as DBAs, we don’t want to have the responsibility of changing any data, but people reviewing changing and verifying processes might just need the verification of the task that is performed is not doing that. They might know that system types permissions may allow for that, so more details that can be provided about a change is useful.
This also comes to patching and applying CPUs (Critical Patch Updates). In reading the release notes and understanding the areas that might be affected, and providing some basic information about that. For example, there is a security fix that might touch a type of driver connection, so testing in the implementation of the patch includes the testing of the connection to the database through this driver and verifies that all connects are still good. Or even stating, the application doesn’t connect through this driver, so there is no effect with this change. However, still as part of a test plan there is probably connection testing from the application. Test plans can reflect the details of the security fixes, or just a quick description of the issues being fixed with some more basic information can really help when approving a change or reviewing and validating a change is what it is.
So, words that are thrown out between DBAs, rebuild, statitics, CPUs, might have a different meaning to others outside of the world we live but are needing to review or approve changes we make. More details or providing some basic training on what some of these simple, minor tasks performed again the database will help bridge that gap. Both sides will benefit from understanding the change for approvals and validation of the processes being followed.