I've always referred to it as a Development DBA. But the gist of separating DBA's into two camps, I've definitely used and seen used in many places. I sometim

I've always referred to it as a Development DBA. But the gist of separating DBA's into two camps, I've definitely used and seen used in many places. I sometimes attribute the modern rise of NoSQL and other databases on the somewhat bad reputation that infrastructure-only DBA's can give to the profession. If the only major thing you do for work is check the backups ran overnight and deny change requests for "stability" reasons, it can really poison the well for others who want to make the database sing. So what do developers do? They cut out the DBA role by inventing complicated but relatively low-maintenance DBs that don't need any DBA's at all - if you have performance issues just spin up another node. Whereas all they often needed was a good Development/Application oriented DBA to sort out their traditional RDBMS properly.