Recently, I was out on the West Coast of the United States to celebrate my son's graduation from college. At a party with some students and their parents, I conversed for a while with one of my son's good friends. This young man was about to get his degree in computer science. We talked shop, and I asked him about the code he'd typically write to interact with a data server. Perhaps he used a generic (i.e., non-DBMS-specific) SQL interface, such as JDBC or ODBC? No, he said, he really didn't know SQL that well. I was a little surprised (on the inside) to hear that. I mean, SQL is kind of fundamental, isn't it? Then I reframed my question: "OK - I guess you'd rather just invoke a data service via something like a REST API, and let that service do what you want done, without having to worry about how the service works or being concerned with any of the particulars of the back-end system on which the service executes?" "Yeah," he said. "More like that."
I know this friend of my son is a smart and hard-working guy. It's not at all like he's too lazy to write data-access code like SQL. He doesn't care to do that because he doesn't need to. He's part of a new generation of developers who see a universe of services of all kinds. Sometimes they'll be involved in the creation of new services. Often they'll look to discover and invoke existing services - data-related and otherwise - to provide application functionality needed by organizations and end-users. This change in the application-development mindset is gaining momentum, and it will have some fairly profound implications for people who administer Db2 for z/OS and other data-serving platforms. Earlier this year I posted a blog entry that focused on the nuts and bolts of Db2's REST interface. In this entry, I'm going to shift from the "how" of the Db2 REST interface to the "so what?"
A really big "so what" for Db2 for z/OS people will be the change in how the data server they support is perceived by application developers - particularly, developers on the client side of client-server applications. For growing numbers of such developers, Db2 for z/OS itself will be seen as, essentially, a utility. And I'm not using "utility" in the technical Db2 sense (e.g., the REORG utility); rather, I mean "utility" as in, "electric utility." Think about that. When you flip the light switch in a room, you expect electricity to flow and lights to come on. You probably don't think about where the electricity came from (maybe a power plant located some miles from your home), or how it was generated (maybe a natural gas-powered generator, maybe a wind farm, maybe a hydroelectric installation by a dam). Your "electricity interface" - the light switch - is easy to use.
if you go from your home to someone else's home, or to a hotel room or to a conference room in an office building, you easily locate the light switch because it looks like the ones in your home; and, you benefit from "consistency of electricity invocation": whether you're at home or in an office or wherever, you flip the switch up and electricity flows. Flip the switch down, flow stops and the lights go out.
Suppose you have an electrical outlet hooked to a switch. You have all manner of electrical devices - a music player, a blender, a printer. They can all be utilized through the same standard interface (the outlet). If you take these devices to another room in another building, the interface is the same: plug 'em in and use 'em. Your thinking is about what you'll do with the electricity you can invoke through the standard interface - not about the way in which the electricity was generated for your use.
OK, your a client-side application programmer, coding in accordance with the REST architectural style. You have a consistent interface by which you can invoke services, and some of those services might be data-related. You (or, more likely, your program will) "flip the switch" by issuing a REST request, and the requested data service (retrieve such-and-such data associated with thus-and-so input, or persist this value, or update this value, or whatever) will get done, as you expect (the lights come on), and you (or your program will) move on to some other action. How did that data service get performed? Where did that data service get performed? DON'T KNOW. DON'T CARE. It worked, didn't it? Do you care about that? Probably not. Why? Because the result - successful execution of the requested service - was expected. When you flip the light switch in a room, do you think, "Cool! THE LIGHTS CAME ON!" No? Neither do I.
Shift the perspective now to that of the people - like DBAs - who work at the "data-services utility," which they know as a Db2 for z/OS system. That system has such cool stuff, doesn't it? Partition-by-growth table spaces! Automatic clean-up of pseudo-deleted index entries! Relative page numbering! LOB in-lining! OLAP expressions! Global locking on a Parallel Sysplex! We geek out about this stuff at conferences. Wouldn't client-side developers like to know about that cool stuff? No, they would not, and that is especially true if their way of interacting with your data-serving utility - invoking REST APIs - completely abstracts your world from their point of view.
Is this "don't know, don't care" mind set of client-side developers regarding the particulars of the system you support a reason to slump your shoulders and feel down about what you do? Of course not. I know plenty of people who work for electric utilities. You can take pride in doing what they do for their consumers: you provide a service (execution of data-processing services) that is easy to invoke via a consistent interface (REST requests). The provided service does WHAT is requested WHEN it is requested (any time, day or night) and as expected (no surprises). Interestingly, the BETTER your data-services utility is at doing what it does, the LESS your consumers (client-side developers) will think about the goings-on at your end. Freak-out time is when the switch is flipped and the lights DON'T come on, or they come on in an unsteady, flicker-y kind of way. You keep delivering service that is boringly (from the consumer perspective) excellent, and when those consumers DO have reason to think about your utility, it will be because they need a data-server for a new application and they want to use that data-services utility that has that rock-steady quality - the one you support.
And let's not forget, in our survey of personas in this new client-server world, the group of people who are key colleagues of the DBAs and the systems programmers at the Db2 for z/OS utility: the SQL programmers. That's right. Remember, when the REST architectural style is employed there is no client-side SQL. Any SQL statements executed at your site will be those invoked via REST requests issued by client-side developers. The SQL - whether an individual statement or a stored procedure - that performs a service associated with a REST request has to be developed by someone, and that someone is generally going to be, from the client-side developer's perspective, a person who works at the data-service utility. A client-side developer may need a new service (as opposed to the situation in which you REST-enable an existing service), and that service may be performed on the utility side through execution of SQL. That detail doesn't matter to the client-side developer, who just says, "I want to send this input and have this action performed and receive this output." Someone on the utility side will analyze the specifications of the required service and will code SQL to get it down. The SQL will be REST-enabled, and away things go: service is invoked (switch is flipped) on the client side, and on the utility side the associated SQL statement (about which the consumer likely has no clue) is executed, and it executes quickly and efficiently and reliably because the DBAs and systems programmers have constructed and maintain an environment that delivers those qualities of service. Thus it is that the SQL developers' role will come to overlap more and more with the role of the DBAs, and vice versa. They're on the same team, and together they provide the so-good-it's-not-noticed level of data service to the client-side consumers.
I've been doing what I do for the better part of 35 years, and this emerging application development landscape has me feeling young again. Client-side developers, I am A-OK with you having little to no visibility with regard to the the technology I support and what I do to support it. When you flip the switch, and my utility is responsible for the lights coming on right away and as expected so that you (your program) can proceed to do something that needs doing, I'll be happy even if you don't give it another thought. Trust me on that one.
Post a Comment