Data Architecture

I love seeing the title Data Architect. See, it helps if one considers "data" as a big gelatinous mass of stuff from which we want things. So for one to be an "architect" of data, one has to grab hold of data as it is produced, and stack it into neat little piles from which our "things" can be extracted later, easily.

Unfortunately, we see Database Administrators using this title more and more because, well, I think the term "Architect" makes people feel very proud of themselves and all their myriad achievements. Ironically, using the title indicates a sad misunderstanding of what data, and databases, really are. A Database Architect, or even Schema Architect, is somebody who decides how data should be organized, once they are presented with that big gelatinous mass of stuff. This is where people use tools like perl, ruby, and even (cue twilight zone noises) awk, sed, cut, tr, and so on (ok, stop with the soundtrack) to format the stuff into the schema which the architect has designed. This is a good process because it means I can get my things out.

I personally love getting data in that giant mass of goo and forming it into something useful, gathering metrics about it so I know how much storage I need, and how my database is going to perform, and so on, but I'm kind of a perv in that regard. What I really wanted to get at, though, was that there's another side, and a title that might be more appropriate than "Data Architect" – Data Archaeologist or Data Archivist. But, please, people, stop tacking "architect" onto your title in places that puff up your business card. It's kind of like kids with Honda Accords and loud mufflers.

"...what's that? I can't hear you over the sound of how much data I'm architecting!"