Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Job Postings For Python, NoSQL, Apache Hadoop Way Up This Year

Soulskill posted about 5 months ago | from the year-of-the-accidental-dba dept.

Databases 52

Nerval's Lobster writes: "Dice [note: our corporate overlord] collects a ton of data from job postings. Its latest findings? The number of jobs posted for NoSQL experts has risen 54 percent year-over-year, ahead of postings for professionals skilled in so-called 'Big Data' (up 46 percent), Apache Hadoop (43 percent), and Python (16 percent). Employers are also seeking those with expertise in Software-as-a-Service platforms, to the tune of 20 percent more job postings over the past twelve months; in a similar vein, postings for tech professionals with some cloud experience have leapt 27 percent in the same period. Nothing earth-shattering here, but it's perhaps interesting to note that, for all the hype surrounding some of these things, there's actually significant demand behind them."

cancel ×

52 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Is SQL really such a bad thing? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46936911)

It seems strange to specifically ask for experts that know no SQL.

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 months ago | (#46937133)

It seems strange to specifically ask for experts that know no SQL.

It shows one can pass HR's buzz-word filters without lying and STILL be a dumbshit.

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46937539)

It shows one can pass HR's buzz-word filters without lying and STILL be a dumbshit.

right???

holy crap you guys...

seriously...

I used to do db admin w/ a 800K contact database for a magazine publishing and tradeshow company including a call center...it was actually a fun job! we did all kinds of data 'pulls' for all departments...we were 'data services'...we used all kinds of programs, Oracle, the M$ products, even some programs we patched together

That was many years ago...

I'm wondering how you guys take it? What is the hiring process?

Given your comment, what happens after passing the HR buzz=word filter? Does the person in charge of the new hire define the job requirements or who? Who has the final say in hiring?

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 5 months ago | (#46939065)

I used to do db admin w/ a 800K contact database...it was actually a fun job!

You poor kid. Would the other kids not play with you as a child?

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46941887)

You poor kid. Would the other kids not play with you as a child?

yes! since age 5 I was kept in a burlap sack and only allowed out to code and poop...my only human contact until after college was a dog groomer my keepers paid to shave my head every 6 months

but for real...it was the people that made it actually fun...I had two great supervisors and...well the company was in downtown Boulder, CO on the main walking mall area...so lunch breaks were fantastic

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 5 months ago | (#46942215)

I might even be tempted to take a db admin job in Boulder, Co...

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46943245)

I'd suggest it...if you're the kind that likes good weather, beautiful scenery (of geological and human kind), being accepted as 'weird' w/o question by your neighbors, awesome restaurants, legal weed, and a big metro area just over the hill and across a federal wetland area 35 miles away...

The misconception some have is that since Boulder is in Colorado that its somehow very 'wintery'...nothing could be further from the truth...it has a wet warm winter...but snow will stay on the ground...300+ days of sun and the altitude makes it feel warmer

If you can work downtown near Pearl Street you can get a really cool place where you can walk to work like a big city feel almost but in a hippie town...its great

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

DeBaas (470886) | about 5 months ago | (#46937221)

I'm sure there are a lot of DBA's that would be happy if less people in the company knew SQL...

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 5 months ago | (#46937251)

It seems strange to specifically ask for experts that know no SQL.

Maybe they want to employ happy programmers!

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (5, Funny)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 5 months ago | (#46937559)

It seems strange to specifically ask for experts that know no SQL.

It's a ploy to get more H1B's into the country. "We can't find any database experts in the U.S. who know no SQL!"

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 5 months ago | (#46937755)

SQL is a bad thing, but not because RDBMSs are a bad idea. Quite the opposite. but all those people leaving RDBMS databases do it because RDBMSs are screwed up both by forcing people to use SQL (which is atrocious in itself) and because most RDBMS vendors have the same attitude now that Lisp machine companies had in the 1980s - they want outrageous money for bloated crap. Then they wonder why people go somewhere else for stuff that should have been commonplace fifteen years ago.

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939047)

Hey bigmouth: You're being called out (why're you running "forrest"?) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 5 months ago | (#46939313)

I would dance a jig if I could get the BU I support to switch to SQL. They are currently building a database of vendor and partner well data. They get the data from a UniData sourced db...upload it to a server that converts it to SQL (Using the corporate licensed Oracle db) just so the Microsoft ACCESS db can pull in the data. Of course for smaller projects why bother with anything but an Excel spreadsheet with thirty or so user generated add-ins that require your credentials which are parsed in plain text.

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 5 months ago | (#46939515)

Well, yeah, there are people still stuck with mainframe(not the good parts)/IMS-level technology. :-) I get that.

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939721)

Hey K. S. Kyosuke ya bigmouth: Yer bein called out (why're ya runnin "forrest"?) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940431)

Hey K. S. Kyosuke ya bigmouth: Yer bein called out (why're ya runnin "forrest"?) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940459)

Hey K. S. Kyosuke ya bigmouth: Yer bein called out (why're ya runnin "forrest"?) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | about 5 months ago | (#46938041)

Is SQL really such a bad thing?

Off course not, but you must combine it with XML, and XSLT. What purpose does it serve to only write a program in SQL at run-time, and have it interpreted at run-time if you do not let the database server wrap the results in a human-hostile text format at run-time and parse it at run-time with the client? Especially if all the object-oriented techniques now make it possible to have enough separation to request the person details at index locations 3, 17 and 173?

If you program blind-panic-style, I can imagine that you fire a zillion overly complicated queries at a server. But if your code is even halfway organized, ISAM-style requests (sorry the buzzword is "NOSQL" these days) work faster, are easier to understand and maintain, and support optimizations like caching out of the box.

Re:Is SQL really such a bad thing? (1)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about 5 months ago | (#46941507)

And yet the NoSQL vendors are generally finding that SQL describes what they want to do without a problem...

And still they won't hire (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46936965)

Sure, they'll post the job. Like posting a job for folks who have four years experience driving Chevy pickups. As if you can't learn the skills they want in two weeks.

But it lets them pretend there's a "skills shortage" while leaving millions of qualified workers begging for hire.

Re:And still they won't hire (1)

GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) | about 5 months ago | (#46937037)

If you think you can learn no-sql, python and the cloud in 2 weeks, you're deeply mistaking. It took me months to get up to speed with OpenStack, and I still learn every day after years doing its Debian packaging. Sure, as it's something new, companies should take into account that their future employee will have to learn and wont know all of this. However, it isn't a reason why not posting needed skills for the job.

Re: And still they won't hire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46937239)

Well learning "the cloud" took about a day, since it's really nothing new. Python is a horrible language but any programmer should be useful after a few days. Hadoop may take a few days more, but data manipulation, storage, and retrieval aren't new inventions.

Sad that people still put narrow labels on others. Sadder still that they are correct in doing so for too many kids today.

Re: And still they won't hire (1)

gitfiddler (702708) | about 5 months ago | (#46955727)

AND GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

Re:And still they won't hire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46937851)

The thing with openstack, is the previously sparse documentation. Now, it's going to be a lot more comprehensive.

Re:And still they won't hire (1)

bzipitidoo (647217) | about 5 months ago | (#46941169)

If a competent programmer who knows SQL and C/C++, and a few other languages, maybe Java and LISP, can't learn enough NoSQL and Python in two weeks to start being productive, then NoSQL and Python are bad platforms and languages. A newcomer will not learn all the quirks, tricks, and libraries in 2 weeks, but doesn't have to. Don't have to know half of the typical bloated language to do useful work in it. As for the cloud, someone experienced with system administration ought to be able to pick up enough to make some good use of it in less than a week.

Re:And still they won't hire (1)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about 5 months ago | (#46941535)

If a competent programmer who knows SQL and C/C++, and a few other languages, maybe Java and LISP, can't learn enough NoSQL and Python in two weeks to start being productive, then NoSQL and Python are bad platforms and languages. A newcomer will not learn all the quirks, tricks, and libraries in 2 weeks, but doesn't have to. Don't have to know half of the typical bloated language to do useful work in it. As for the cloud, someone experienced with system administration ought to be able to pick up enough to make some good use of it in less than a week.

In his example the issue is not necessary NoSQL or Python, it's how they are used by the other stuff (e.g OpenStack). Learning Python is the easy part; figuring out how everything inter-relates in OpenStack is the hard part.

Re:And still they won't hire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46942359)

This is because OpenStack is shit. It's a half-working framework that you can make work with only a herculean effort in a small environment, or with a monumentally earth-shattering effort in a large, complex enterprise.

It will get better, for sure, but right now it's shit.

Percentages? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46936995)

Percentages can be very misleading, do they have raw numbers?

If there was only one python posting last year but 10 this year, that's 1000%!!!

Re:Percentages? (4, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | about 5 months ago | (#46937009)

Not just raw numbers, some sort of weighting system would be useful too. A lot of postings I've seen throw in a lot of these technologies as sort of a "nice to have", but don't really require them nor will they most likely be used on the job. However the search engine will still hit upon them, influencing the numbers. TFA has no mention of their methodology or what they define the various positions to be, so I'm guessing their methodology is "search every job posting we have had for certain words and count them".... Wonder if they used map-reduce to do so :P

Re:Percentages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939665)

Also need to know which are actual open positions.

Government projects are big on big data lately and 10 companies will advertise the same position - each harvesting resumes for a proposal to the same RFP.

And at the heart of these contracts is a government project manager who's just tired of paying for Oracle licenses, so it's not the most exiting work in the world.

Re:Percentages? (5, Informative)

Sarusa (104047) | about 5 months ago | (#46937041)

TFA is kind of dumb for not giving the numbers, but a quick search on Dice turns up 4800 python listings.

Compare to 1770 Hadoop listings, 1490 NoSQL, and 3250 for 'Big Data' and you can see that it's kind of the opposite of what you were suggesting. The reason Python is only up 16% is because it had so many listings last year already.

2700 Ruby listings for comparison, regarding another post.

Re:Percentages? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938119)

16599 for Java
15924 for C,
3359 for PHP
4327 for Perl
0 for fortran (heh)
0 for COBOL (heh)
2657 for iOS
2522 for Android
27 for Lisp
11055 for Linux
36 for Haskell
373 for Scala
425 for Groovy

etc. etc..

These numbers mean hardly anything at all. Dice has serious selection bias too.

Re:Percentages? (1)

umghhh (965931) | about 5 months ago | (#46937165)

TFA speaks about increase so I assume you too. For 1000% increase you would have to have 11 times as many postings this year as you had last year i.e. 1 posting last year and 11 postings this year meaning there are 10 more i.e. this 1000% increase. That is what you get when you use percents and wrong example.

Re:Percentages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940699)

Parent didn't say anything about an increase. Assuming "1000% increase" is brain dead logic when you could have easily interpreted it as "1000% of last year's postings".

"Let me choose the interpretation that makes least amount of sense and be a smartass about how what was said does not make sense."

Re:Percentages? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46937585)

Anecdotal, but I've basically got all the skills listed in this article. I started job hunting a few weeks ago (mid April). The last time I went job hunting, about 6 years ago, my rule of thumb was that roughly 1 out of every 5 recruiters I spoke to would translate to an interview. This time around, every one of them seems to land multiple opportunities. I've done at least 3 phone interviews each week. This week alone I've had one face-to-face on Monday, and 4 more phone screens. I've never seen anything like this level of interest before.

Re:Percentages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46937715)

Anecdotal, but I've basically got all the skills listed in this article. I started job hunting a few weeks ago (mid April). The last time I went job hunting, about 6 years ago, my rule of thumb was that roughly 1 out of every 5 recruiters I spoke to would translate to an interview. This time around, every one of them seems to land multiple opportunities. I've done at least 3 phone interviews each week. This week alone I've had one face-to-face on Monday, and 4 more phone screens. I've never seen anything like this level of interest before.

You have multiple opportunities yet are unable to successfully close the deal during the interview or telephone screening? I detest telephone screenings because without exception the person on the other end of the wire/airwave is Indian with an agenda.

Re:Percentages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938031)

Haven't found the one I want yet. I'm not desperate, so I'm not just jumping on the first thing that comes along.

Re:Percentages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46937737)

More "interest" doesn't translate into more of a chance at employment, especially if they're really doing the H-1B "skills shortage" game and using the recruiter so they have proof they tried.

Ruby on Rails dominates job ads I see (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46936999)

especially for working remotely [weworkremotely.com] .

LAMP (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 5 months ago | (#46937039)

LPNAH just isn't the same.

The mind of a PHB (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 months ago | (#46937145)

for all the hype surrounding some of these things, there's actually significant demand behind them

It could be the typical PHB gets sucked into the hype and tosses those buzzwords into the job ad to make sure he's getting the "freshest talent". The ad is already stuffed with gazillion buzzwords, so why not gazillion + 1

"Python" - no they want specific CMS niche skills (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46937811)

Sure, the job may say "Python" or "PHP" in the title, but .... they usually want niche skills with some CMS you've never heard of written in these languages, and if you read the whole job writeup, it's not a "Python" job other than you need to know Python to write extensions for the CMS. So if you know Python programming, you still won't get the job.

The reason why there's a "shortage" of skills at the same time there's a glut of developers available is the insanely narrow specialization that companies want. There aren't many people who have even heard of the CMS-of-the-week the company uses, let alone knows its internals well enough to do what the company wants done. Companies seem very good at picking losers in the technology race, and get stuck with things that are evolutionary dead ends, further limiting their talent pool.

Big data is probably the same thing, but I don't know anything about it.

Re:"Python" - no they want specific CMS niche skil (1)

aprdm (2451390) | about 5 months ago | (#46940633)

What is CMS?

Re: What is CMS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46941293)

Content Management System

mod 3own (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938073)

all; in ord3r to go

Coincidentally. . . (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | about 5 months ago | (#46938629)

work performed by people relying on these folks to do their jobs falls dramatically. IT support staff frazzled at having to constantly find solutions to problems created by people who are supposedly wizards at what they do.

IT management oblivious to problems so long as products get shoved at door and they can make their bonuses.

Small market, big percentage changes (2)

tomhath (637240) | about 5 months ago | (#46938665)

Those were all niche markets a couple of years ago so big percentage increases don't mean all that much.

IMHO...most companies won't ever have a use for Hadoop. "Big Data" is a buzz word that doesn't mean anything. "Cloud" doesn't require a specially trained expert. NoSQL is another word for caching, which most enterprisy applications don't do well, so that's worth knowing (especially if the app is trying to use Java/Hibernate for persistence, yuck). Python will continue increasing in popularity because there isn't a better alternative for quick scripting and small applications, Java is too cumbersome for small tasks.

Re:Small market, big percentage changes (1)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 5 months ago | (#46940757)

How is NoSQL another word for caching? You can use NoSQL databases to implement cache systems, but that in no way is the extent of it (the term itself is very, very vague and means a multitude of different approaches to handle data).

Re:Small market, big percentage changes (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 5 months ago | (#46941039)

(the term itself is very, very vague and means a multitude of different approaches to handle data)

Yes, that's a big part of the problem. But when you listen to the reasons to use NoSql they all come down to having the data stored in a manner the application can get to it quickly, with less consideration given to the usual RDB concerns like data integrity and normalization. To me, that's a cache (although "cache" is also a vague term).

Re:Small market, big percentage changes (1)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 5 months ago | (#46941549)

Actually to me NoSQL means firstly schema-less data and not ACID operations. But then there are NoSQL DBs that allow defining schames and have ACID operations.

But try to explain that to your average recruiter.

"Big" data projects? (1)

mcrbids (148650) | about 5 months ago | (#46940209)

I wonder how many of those jobs for "big data" involve data sets that will sit on a USB drive?

PHB: "But it's a TERABYTE, at least!"

In search of Big Data Engineers in S Florida! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46942545)

In search of Big Data Engineers in S Florida! Let's talk tech! http://lnkd.in/dbKtwW9
Please contact me @954-541-8451 Adriana

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?